Three years after it became universally acknowledged that Covid vaccines provide negligible protection against infection and transmission, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) has finally dropped its Covid vaccine mandate.
Thanks Rebekah. Terrible behaviour that makes it very clear that Covid was always about power and control, but not about health. And it was not based on science. Extraordinarily, the people wielding that power - politicians at both state and federal (in the case of AFP) levels - are now asking to be re-elected. And it seems that many of them will be re-elected, which is a disturbing reflection of the role of the media. There’s no other way to make sense of all that has happened.
It's hard not to enter the realm of conspiracy theory, but there are so many apparent links between the prolonged institutional mandates, the corruption unearthed by DOGE, the aims of the UN, WHO, WEF, and the Gateses and Soroses of the world.
All aided and abetted by the Uniparty throughout the Western world.
Personally I try to live as organic and "off grid" a life as I can, educate and resist as much as possible, and enjoy the wonders of my wife, children and grandchildren, growing my own fruit and vegetables, and being as independent from the Big State as as I am able.
I suggest everyone who has been vaccinated in a hostile climate of coercion and mandates has NOT given valid consent.
Even people who apparently willingly submitted to the vaccines, they didn't give valid consent.
Because 'the authorities' spread fear-mongering mis/disinformation about 'Covid', aka lies.
People were threatened with losing their livelihood and participation in society if they refused to 'consent' to the injections.
Threatened that they wouldn't be allowed to travel, go to restaurants, retail shopping, participate in entertainment, go to the pub, go to the gym...etc...
It was 'No Jab, No Job' to 'No Jab, No Life'.
It's not possible to give valid voluntary informed consent for vaccination when people are threatened with a penalty if they refuse to comply.
I also have a letter from AHPRA, dated 20 September 2021, confirming: "Practitioners have an obligation to obtain informed consent for treatment, including vaccination. Informed consent is a person’s voluntary decision about health care that is made with knowledge and understanding of the benefits and risks involved." See: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/response-from-ahpra-re-informed-consent.pdf
Is there anybody out there who understands this? ANYONE?!?!?!?!
How about you Rebekah, do you understand it????
Seriously, it was confirmed by the Australian Government in December 2021 and November 2022 that informed consent must be obtained for COVID-19 vaccination and other vaccination, and AHPRA confirmed similarly in a letter to me dated September 2021...yet at the same time coercion and MANDATES WERE IN PLACE!!!!
Does anyone see the contradiction???? Looks like it's in plain sight to me, goodness knows I've shared this information enough times!!!! If this had been recognised years ago, people wouldn't have been discriminated against for exercising their own personal choice in refusing the vaccines, because obviously they should have the freedom to do this via valid voluntary informed consent.
So here's what I think... All those vaccinating practitioners who injected people when coercion and mandates were in operation in the community, they haven't obtained valid consent, because it's not possible to obtain valid voluntary informed consent from people who are under duress to comply and who have been told a tissue of lies about a purported threat, i.e. 'Covid'.
If this had been addressed years ago we wouldn't be in this mess.
We'll see what happens going forward, but it seems to me the vaccinating practitioners are going to be thrown under the bus for not obtaining valid voluntary informed consent. Those people who were discriminated against and penalised for exercising what should have been their free choice, without penalty, I hope they will find a way to pursue those who put in place the vaccine mandates. And who was that exactly? Who specifically put the vaccine mandates in place? These people must be identified.
Yes I agree Elizabeth and have written about it many times. I think a lot of people see it and have discussed it for years but as long as the politicians keep saying that mandatory vaccines are voluntary, and as long as the judiciary keeps calling mandates 'lawful and valid', we won't see any change.
I shared in my previous comment letters from the Australian Government and AHPRA that confirm that vaccinating practitioners have an obligation to obtain informed consent...CONSENT...
There it is - EVIDENCE...from years ago!!!
Evidence that should surely be used to challenge the vaccinating practitioners who OBVIOUSLY cannot obtain valid voluntary informed consent from people who are under duress, who have actually been threatened THEY WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS AND PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETY IF THEY REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO THE COVID-19 INJECTIONS!!!
Talk about stand-over tactics!!!
The vaccinating practitioners collaborated with this as 'agents of the state'!!!
They should have refused to engage in this, injecting people they knew were appearing before them under duress, under threat of losing their livelihood and participation in society, along with being told a tissue of lies about 'Covid'.
This HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA!!!
And the medical 'profession' went along with it, along with most of society.
Those who refused to go along with it were discriminated against, ostracised, shut out of society at the height of the deliberately manufactured 'Covid' debacle.
Rebekah, you say "the judiciary keeps calling mandates 'lawful and valid'".
It seems to me 'the judiciary' calling mandates 'lawful and valid' has caused a disaster, because it seems 'the judiciary' has completely overlooked the responsibility of vaccinating practitioners to obtain valid voluntary informed consent for vaccination, as any practitioner should do for any intervention.
The vaccinating practitioners themselves should have refused to collaborate with coercion and mandates...but they didn't, they injected people they knew were under duress, they were conscripted to act as 'agents of the state', under the dictates of bullyboy AHPRA's Position Statement 9 March 2021.
This isn't just about Australia, this is any jurisdiction which violated voluntary informed consent for vaccination.
Whoever was pulling the strings on this international shitshow...it seems they overlooked the fact that the vaccinators are obligated to obtain valid consent.
For example, as acknowledged by the Australian Government in December 2021 and November 2022: "Informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations." (See links below.)
That sentence is pure solid GOLD Rebekah...and it's not just about COVID-19 vaccines...
Mass non compliance wrt to what appears to be appalling regulations requires far more synchronicity than can ever happen. People are just not that much in unison at the same time. It is a logistic impossibility. Put yourself in the position of a GP who was opposed to the jabs, who'd invested so much of their lives in becoming a doctor but who could not count on the simultaneous support of enough colleagues. AHPRA's directive would have been too powerful to resist. And this was both known and calculated. It was like chess.
What the two year experiment revealed was that the masses could be indoctrinated to believe absurdities and that those who were BS resistant could be bullied into compliance through the threat of punishment.
From the point of view of mass control it was a resounding success.
Kershaw lied to Senate enquiries about the number of protesters in Canberra, with a smug, arrogant attitude. It tells you much about his attitude to truth, justice, fairness, process, and the kind of culture he would foster in the AFP. Such people should have no place in "public service".
In my journey . . a lot of deep creepy rabbit holes have had to be explored courageously just to gain context of how big and convoluted the puzzle really is - and processing that gained context has required some extraneous spiritual endeavour and patient discernment to acquire the scope to incorporate those discoveries into something understandable and meaningful.
A clue to that acquisition is the statement - " Life is happening for you, not to you". And the scope that the clue reveals is that an opportunity has come . . to us all, according to our personal capacities, . . to see beyond the constraints of illusions that govern our reality.
This awakening, while excruciatingly humbling, opens up an extension of spectrum to one's human sensibilities offering a potential for extraordinary personal insight and growth - an expanded consciousness of relationship to creation itself.
Does that help to ' make it make sense' ? The alternative is the fog of 'incredulity' . . until it clears . . whence that journey can begin.
(I admit I've just made a pretty lofty statement - but I know it will resonate with some . . and maybe others later - coz there's still time.)
Interesting anecdotes, Rebekah, although an anecdote is an anecdote is an anecdote.:)
I wonder how these officers stack up in the moral calculus. They spent many years taking pay for engaging in morally dubious behaviour (fining motorists for non dangerous driving, being a part of goon squads knocking over the front doors of relatively innocent folk, prosecuting dubious laws around contraband and so on - all supposedly in the name of community SAFETY) and yet resign to avoid taking a jab they strongly BELIEVED (not KNEW) to be more harmful than effective, even if that placed their families in financial jeopardy. Many of their colleagues would have believed they were taking the jab for the team A (Australia) and team F (family) would have perceived the resisting officers as selfish. I imagine ostracism would have existed, furthermore. People's actions need to be judged, in large part, by their beliefs. How else to look at the Bible bashing witch burners of yesteryear?
As usual there are a number of ways of looking at this issue.
LINS.
As far as their superordinates were concerned, they were all locked into a powerful chain of command, the higher the position, the greater the salary and greater to lose from disobedience. I would like to know what the drivers were for individuals like Scomo, McGowan and Andrews. We will never know. And I do not count biography and autobiography as reliable.
And I just learnt (from you) that two or three (years) counts as 'several' (years).:)
Hope your antibacterial nasal spray served you well in your very touristy trip to Fiji.:)
I had always perceived 'several' to have more or less the same meaning as 'many'.
We all have our own lexicons
Another consideration in all of this is that vaccine efficacy and danger exist in DEGREES.
Whilst the jab clearly did not stop transmission (and was therefore not the stuff of herd immunity), it might have caused c19 symptoms to be less severe and less likely to result in hospitalisation. I recall that data from the UK in late 2021 suggested that unvaxxed were OVERrepresented in hospitals for C19 (by a factor of X) and vaxxed were UNDER represented by a factor of Y, where X x Y was about 10.
It is not good enough to simply state that the jab was ineffective.
And hospital pressure was always the strongest card played by authorities.
Well, it was the AFP’s risk assessment that called the shots ineffective (pertaining to transmission and infection) based on the studies reviewed. As referenced in the article, if the AFP were concerned about hospital pressure, they would have been wise to follow the science and address weight and comorbidities. Vitamin D supplementation would also have been far less disruptive to the workforce and potentially much more effective.
There are many things a person can do to reduce their health burden on the community (both during plagues and else), exercise (of body and mind) being amongst them. These require SELF DISCIPLINE, however, which is in short supply and which is very likely a matter of genetic disposition, anyway.
Fat shaming might amount to little more than a statement of a person's genetics.
Another thing to consider is that bodily maintenance might simply delay the onset of morbidity, though not reduce its extent, in time. That is, Person A takes good care of their self but requires medical intervention from 70 to 90 (death) whilst Person B does not and requires medical intervention from 55 to 75 (death).
Thanks Rebekah. Terrible behaviour that makes it very clear that Covid was always about power and control, but not about health. And it was not based on science. Extraordinarily, the people wielding that power - politicians at both state and federal (in the case of AFP) levels - are now asking to be re-elected. And it seems that many of them will be re-elected, which is a disturbing reflection of the role of the media. There’s no other way to make sense of all that has happened.
It's hard not to enter the realm of conspiracy theory, but there are so many apparent links between the prolonged institutional mandates, the corruption unearthed by DOGE, the aims of the UN, WHO, WEF, and the Gateses and Soroses of the world.
All aided and abetted by the Uniparty throughout the Western world.
Personally I try to live as organic and "off grid" a life as I can, educate and resist as much as possible, and enjoy the wonders of my wife, children and grandchildren, growing my own fruit and vegetables, and being as independent from the Big State as as I am able.
Sounds like a good way to live Gareth.
The AFP has much more to answer for.
https://open.substack.com/pub/markneugebauer/p/presentation-of-evidence-for-alleged?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=yi4k6
Meanwhile...
I suggest everyone who has been vaccinated in a hostile climate of coercion and mandates has NOT given valid consent.
Even people who apparently willingly submitted to the vaccines, they didn't give valid consent.
Because 'the authorities' spread fear-mongering mis/disinformation about 'Covid', aka lies.
People were threatened with losing their livelihood and participation in society if they refused to 'consent' to the injections.
Threatened that they wouldn't be allowed to travel, go to restaurants, retail shopping, participate in entertainment, go to the pub, go to the gym...etc...
It was 'No Jab, No Job' to 'No Jab, No Life'.
It's not possible to give valid voluntary informed consent for vaccination when people are threatened with a penalty if they refuse to comply.
The Australian Government confirmed in a letter to Emma McArthur, dated 21 December 2021, that "...informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual procedures for other vaccinations". This letter also confirms that vaccinating practitioners DO NOT have specific indemnity for administering the COVID-19 injections, see: https://humanityattheprecipice.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/doh-reply-21-12-2021.pdf I also have a similar letter from the Australian Government dated 17 November 2022, see: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/mc22-018819-signed-highlighted-1.pdf
I also have a letter from AHPRA, dated 20 September 2021, confirming: "Practitioners have an obligation to obtain informed consent for treatment, including vaccination. Informed consent is a person’s voluntary decision about health care that is made with knowledge and understanding of the benefits and risks involved." See: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/response-from-ahpra-re-informed-consent.pdf
Is there anybody out there who understands this? ANYONE?!?!?!?!
How about you Rebekah, do you understand it????
Seriously, it was confirmed by the Australian Government in December 2021 and November 2022 that informed consent must be obtained for COVID-19 vaccination and other vaccination, and AHPRA confirmed similarly in a letter to me dated September 2021...yet at the same time coercion and MANDATES WERE IN PLACE!!!!
Does anyone see the contradiction???? Looks like it's in plain sight to me, goodness knows I've shared this information enough times!!!! If this had been recognised years ago, people wouldn't have been discriminated against for exercising their own personal choice in refusing the vaccines, because obviously they should have the freedom to do this via valid voluntary informed consent.
So here's what I think... All those vaccinating practitioners who injected people when coercion and mandates were in operation in the community, they haven't obtained valid consent, because it's not possible to obtain valid voluntary informed consent from people who are under duress to comply and who have been told a tissue of lies about a purported threat, i.e. 'Covid'.
If this had been addressed years ago we wouldn't be in this mess.
We'll see what happens going forward, but it seems to me the vaccinating practitioners are going to be thrown under the bus for not obtaining valid voluntary informed consent. Those people who were discriminated against and penalised for exercising what should have been their free choice, without penalty, I hope they will find a way to pursue those who put in place the vaccine mandates. And who was that exactly? Who specifically put the vaccine mandates in place? These people must be identified.
Yes I agree Elizabeth and have written about it many times. I think a lot of people see it and have discussed it for years but as long as the politicians keep saying that mandatory vaccines are voluntary, and as long as the judiciary keeps calling mandates 'lawful and valid', we won't see any change.
I haven't just discussed it Rebekah, I've undertaken substantial correspondence on this matter for years, see for example on this webpage: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/vax-australia/
I shared in my previous comment letters from the Australian Government and AHPRA that confirm that vaccinating practitioners have an obligation to obtain informed consent...CONSENT...
There it is - EVIDENCE...from years ago!!!
Evidence that should surely be used to challenge the vaccinating practitioners who OBVIOUSLY cannot obtain valid voluntary informed consent from people who are under duress, who have actually been threatened THEY WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS AND PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETY IF THEY REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO THE COVID-19 INJECTIONS!!!
Talk about stand-over tactics!!!
The vaccinating practitioners collaborated with this as 'agents of the state'!!!
They should have refused to engage in this, injecting people they knew were appearing before them under duress, under threat of losing their livelihood and participation in society, along with being told a tissue of lies about 'Covid'.
This HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA!!!
And the medical 'profession' went along with it, along with most of society.
Those who refused to go along with it were discriminated against, ostracised, shut out of society at the height of the deliberately manufactured 'Covid' debacle.
This ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA.
It's UNBLOODYBELIEVEABLE!!!
Yes I understand.
And more evidence here...
Misfeasance in Public Office? The Destruction of Voluntary Informed Consent for Vaccination, June 2024: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/misfeasance-in-public-office-the-destruction-of-voluntary-informed-consent-for-vaccination.pdf
Rebekah, you say "the judiciary keeps calling mandates 'lawful and valid'".
It seems to me 'the judiciary' calling mandates 'lawful and valid' has caused a disaster, because it seems 'the judiciary' has completely overlooked the responsibility of vaccinating practitioners to obtain valid voluntary informed consent for vaccination, as any practitioner should do for any intervention.
The vaccinating practitioners themselves should have refused to collaborate with coercion and mandates...but they didn't, they injected people they knew were under duress, they were conscripted to act as 'agents of the state', under the dictates of bullyboy AHPRA's Position Statement 9 March 2021.
This isn't just about Australia, this is any jurisdiction which violated voluntary informed consent for vaccination.
Whoever was pulling the strings on this international shitshow...it seems they overlooked the fact that the vaccinators are obligated to obtain valid consent.
For example, as acknowledged by the Australian Government in December 2021 and November 2022: "Informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations." (See links below.)
That sentence is pure solid GOLD Rebekah...and it's not just about COVID-19 vaccines...
https://humanityattheprecipice.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/doh-reply-21-12-2021.pdf
https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/mc22-018819-signed-highlighted-1.pdf
Mass non compliance wrt to what appears to be appalling regulations requires far more synchronicity than can ever happen. People are just not that much in unison at the same time. It is a logistic impossibility. Put yourself in the position of a GP who was opposed to the jabs, who'd invested so much of their lives in becoming a doctor but who could not count on the simultaneous support of enough colleagues. AHPRA's directive would have been too powerful to resist. And this was both known and calculated. It was like chess.
What the two year experiment revealed was that the masses could be indoctrinated to believe absurdities and that those who were BS resistant could be bullied into compliance through the threat of punishment.
From the point of view of mass control it was a resounding success.
Kershaw lied to Senate enquiries about the number of protesters in Canberra, with a smug, arrogant attitude. It tells you much about his attitude to truth, justice, fairness, process, and the kind of culture he would foster in the AFP. Such people should have no place in "public service".
"Make it make sense" . .
In my journey . . a lot of deep creepy rabbit holes have had to be explored courageously just to gain context of how big and convoluted the puzzle really is - and processing that gained context has required some extraneous spiritual endeavour and patient discernment to acquire the scope to incorporate those discoveries into something understandable and meaningful.
A clue to that acquisition is the statement - " Life is happening for you, not to you". And the scope that the clue reveals is that an opportunity has come . . to us all, according to our personal capacities, . . to see beyond the constraints of illusions that govern our reality.
This awakening, while excruciatingly humbling, opens up an extension of spectrum to one's human sensibilities offering a potential for extraordinary personal insight and growth - an expanded consciousness of relationship to creation itself.
Does that help to ' make it make sense' ? The alternative is the fog of 'incredulity' . . until it clears . . whence that journey can begin.
(I admit I've just made a pretty lofty statement - but I know it will resonate with some . . and maybe others later - coz there's still time.)
"Life is happening for you, not to you" - one of my favourite meditations.
Interesting anecdotes, Rebekah, although an anecdote is an anecdote is an anecdote.:)
I wonder how these officers stack up in the moral calculus. They spent many years taking pay for engaging in morally dubious behaviour (fining motorists for non dangerous driving, being a part of goon squads knocking over the front doors of relatively innocent folk, prosecuting dubious laws around contraband and so on - all supposedly in the name of community SAFETY) and yet resign to avoid taking a jab they strongly BELIEVED (not KNEW) to be more harmful than effective, even if that placed their families in financial jeopardy. Many of their colleagues would have believed they were taking the jab for the team A (Australia) and team F (family) would have perceived the resisting officers as selfish. I imagine ostracism would have existed, furthermore. People's actions need to be judged, in large part, by their beliefs. How else to look at the Bible bashing witch burners of yesteryear?
As usual there are a number of ways of looking at this issue.
LINS.
As far as their superordinates were concerned, they were all locked into a powerful chain of command, the higher the position, the greater the salary and greater to lose from disobedience. I would like to know what the drivers were for individuals like Scomo, McGowan and Andrews. We will never know. And I do not count biography and autobiography as reliable.
And I just learnt (from you) that two or three (years) counts as 'several' (years).:)
Hope your antibacterial nasal spray served you well in your very touristy trip to Fiji.:)
What did you think several meant?
More than a ‘few’ and less than a dozen?
I had always perceived 'several' to have more or less the same meaning as 'many'.
We all have our own lexicons
Another consideration in all of this is that vaccine efficacy and danger exist in DEGREES.
Whilst the jab clearly did not stop transmission (and was therefore not the stuff of herd immunity), it might have caused c19 symptoms to be less severe and less likely to result in hospitalisation. I recall that data from the UK in late 2021 suggested that unvaxxed were OVERrepresented in hospitals for C19 (by a factor of X) and vaxxed were UNDER represented by a factor of Y, where X x Y was about 10.
It is not good enough to simply state that the jab was ineffective.
And hospital pressure was always the strongest card played by authorities.
Well, it was the AFP’s risk assessment that called the shots ineffective (pertaining to transmission and infection) based on the studies reviewed. As referenced in the article, if the AFP were concerned about hospital pressure, they would have been wise to follow the science and address weight and comorbidities. Vitamin D supplementation would also have been far less disruptive to the workforce and potentially much more effective.
There are many things a person can do to reduce their health burden on the community (both during plagues and else), exercise (of body and mind) being amongst them. These require SELF DISCIPLINE, however, which is in short supply and which is very likely a matter of genetic disposition, anyway.
Fat shaming might amount to little more than a statement of a person's genetics.
Another thing to consider is that bodily maintenance might simply delay the onset of morbidity, though not reduce its extent, in time. That is, Person A takes good care of their self but requires medical intervention from 70 to 90 (death) whilst Person B does not and requires medical intervention from 55 to 75 (death).
None of this is easy. LINS.