I continue to interpret e-safety messages through the lens of ‘safe and effective’ saturation advertising over the last couple of years by governments, politicians and official agencies. It is now abundantly clear that these messages demonstrated misinformation and disinformation on a grand scale, and the level of hypocrisy of those same people attacking free speech is, well, breathtaking.
I continue to interpret e-safety messages through the lens of ‘safe and effective’ saturation advertising over the last couple of years by governments, politicians and official agencies. It is now abundantly clear that these messages demonstrated misinformation and disinformation on a grand scale, and the level of hypocrisy of those same people attacking free speech is, well, breathtaking.
The Bible verse about removing the plank from your own eye before commenting on the speck in someone else’s comes to mind. Hard to take gov seriously with a plank wedged in its figurative eye.
Exactly Barry, the ‘safe and effective’ messages were gross misinformation and disinformation from politicians, bureaucrats, the medical and scientific establishment, and the mainstream media. And also reinforced by the legal system, which failed to protect people from mandatory medical interventions, i.e. COVID-19 vaccination.
Is this what the misinformation disinformation bill is really all about, protecting the rotten system, considering: 2.1.4 Excluded content for misinformation purposes (Clause 2), specifically:
QUOTE
Authorised government content in Australia
Content authorised by the government of the Commonwealth, a State, a Territory or a local government area will be exempt from the powers. For example, this could be social media post from a State’s transport department about an upcoming road project or health campaign.
END OF QUOTE
Is this action being taken to possibly retrospectively try to protect governments that told a tissue of lies in the past...e.g. re Covid?
After finally finding the time to listen to Julian Gillespie’s interview with Dr John Campbell, my conclusions are this was malevolent disinformation by pharmaceutical companies.
Disinformation by govt bureaucrats who should have known better & criminally negligent misinformation by politicians that were too gullible & scientifically illiterate to know any better.
Those same politicians are now frantically trying to cover their behinds by denying, obfuscating & labelling any true information as mis/dis information.
Tomaraki, for some background on the diabolical situation that unfolded in Australia, particularly re vaccine mandates and the trashing of voluntary informed consent for COVID-19 vaccination, see:
- Coercion, intimidation and mandates preclude voluntary informed consent for vaccination. There has been no valid consent for COVID-19 vaccination:
“Is this action being taken to possibly retrospectively try to protect governments that told a tissue of lies in the past...e.g. re Covid?”
I would say Yes! - definitively Yes! However - I suggest that the ‘tissue of lies’ phrase you have used to describe the lying politicians and ‘health’ bureaucrats is far too soft. A much more accurate description would be “an orchestrated litany of lies”.
This phrase has become famous in the aviation world as a descriptor of officials and corporate apparatchiks who lie to the public to hide their guilt. The term was first used in the wake of a shocking accident in 1979 in which Air New Zealand Flight 901 crashed into Mount Erebus in Antarctica with the loss of all 257 persons on board. The aircraft was full of tourists on a sightseeing flight over Antarctica.
The New Zealand Government’s official accident report released by the Chief Inspector of Air Accidents cited ‘serious pilot error’ as the main cause of the accident. (Air New Zealand was owned by the NZ Government and was a flagship symbol of New Zealand’s national competence). As you can imagine, the loss affected a very large number of families in New Zealand and many of the bereaved felt that pressure had been brought to bear to deflect blame by misidentifying the true cause. Historically, dead pilots have always made a good repository for attributing blame.
Public demand led to the formation of a Royal Commission into the accident. The judge appointed to head the Commission was a Justice Peter Mahon (1923-1986). He produced his report in April 1981 – 17 months after the accident. He cleared the crew of blame for the disaster and found that the major cause was the reprogramming of the aircraft's navigation computer without the crew being notified. Mahon claimed that after the accident, Air New Zealand executives had engaged in a conspiracy to whitewash the original inquiry, covering up evidence and lying to investigators. Mahon concluded that they had told "an orchestrated litany of lies". His subsequent book, ‘Verdict on Erebus’ - an account of his inquiry, won book awards.
But the NZ Government officials & politicians would not rest – they subsequently appealed the matter in the U.K. Privy Council. (The archaic law at the time allowed them to take this ridiculous step). The British Privy Council effectively disallowed Justice Mahon’s findings on what could only be described as bullshit legal technicalities. Peter Mahon was subsequently hounded by ‘the system’ and retired from the High Court bench in 1982.
He died suddenly and prematurely in 1986 at the age of 62. Many in the airline pilot profession regard Peter Mahon as a hero – and suspect that he was hounded to his death. In 2008, he was posthumously awarded a Memorial Award by the Airline Pilots Association for exceptional contributions to air safety – “in forever changing the general approach used in transport accident investigations worldwide."
I tell you all this because there are lessons to be learned from the sad tale of ANZ Flight 901 about how government officialdom and politicians are already moving to deflect blame from themselves for the soaring ‘all causes’ Covid vax deaths. As just one example – the government authorities in Britain have a lot of explaining to do about what are now being described as ‘The Midazolam Euthanasia Murders’ of many 1000’s of old people in U.K. nursing homes early in the pandemic, and the false attribution of their deaths to Covid. But it appears that the British state is moving to throttle any real investigation. That ‘lack of interest’ has also been our experience here in Australia thus far. The only action available to us at the moment is to pressure our elected representatives into calling a proper inquiry. A good place to start would be the politicians who were in charge at the time.
I continue to interpret e-safety messages through the lens of ‘safe and effective’ saturation advertising over the last couple of years by governments, politicians and official agencies. It is now abundantly clear that these messages demonstrated misinformation and disinformation on a grand scale, and the level of hypocrisy of those same people attacking free speech is, well, breathtaking.
The Bible verse about removing the plank from your own eye before commenting on the speck in someone else’s comes to mind. Hard to take gov seriously with a plank wedged in its figurative eye.
Exactly Barry, the ‘safe and effective’ messages were gross misinformation and disinformation from politicians, bureaucrats, the medical and scientific establishment, and the mainstream media. And also reinforced by the legal system, which failed to protect people from mandatory medical interventions, i.e. COVID-19 vaccination.
Is this what the misinformation disinformation bill is really all about, protecting the rotten system, considering: 2.1.4 Excluded content for misinformation purposes (Clause 2), specifically:
QUOTE
Authorised government content in Australia
Content authorised by the government of the Commonwealth, a State, a Territory or a local government area will be exempt from the powers. For example, this could be social media post from a State’s transport department about an upcoming road project or health campaign.
END OF QUOTE
Is this action being taken to possibly retrospectively try to protect governments that told a tissue of lies in the past...e.g. re Covid?
* https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/communications-legislation-amendment-combatting-misinformation-and-disinformation-bill-2023-guidance-note-june2023_2.pdf
After finally finding the time to listen to Julian Gillespie’s interview with Dr John Campbell, my conclusions are this was malevolent disinformation by pharmaceutical companies.
Disinformation by govt bureaucrats who should have known better & criminally negligent misinformation by politicians that were too gullible & scientifically illiterate to know any better.
Those same politicians are now frantically trying to cover their behinds by denying, obfuscating & labelling any true information as mis/dis information.
https://youtu.be/nbh_NB6LNaI?si=rnBIE23icd9ewvmN
This one’s queued in my listening list!
Well worth it.
Tomaraki, for some background on the diabolical situation that unfolded in Australia, particularly re vaccine mandates and the trashing of voluntary informed consent for COVID-19 vaccination, see:
- Coercion, intimidation and mandates preclude voluntary informed consent for vaccination. There has been no valid consent for COVID-19 vaccination:
https://elizabethhart.substack.com/p/coercion-intimidation-and-mandates
- The destruction of voluntary informed consent via mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. "A political decision, not a health decision":
https://elizabethhart.substack.com/p/the-destruction-of-voluntary-informed
Thank you Elizabeth. Will read both. I lived it in Dan Andrews’s Victoria.
Elizabeth – you rightfully ask:
“Is this action being taken to possibly retrospectively try to protect governments that told a tissue of lies in the past...e.g. re Covid?”
I would say Yes! - definitively Yes! However - I suggest that the ‘tissue of lies’ phrase you have used to describe the lying politicians and ‘health’ bureaucrats is far too soft. A much more accurate description would be “an orchestrated litany of lies”.
This phrase has become famous in the aviation world as a descriptor of officials and corporate apparatchiks who lie to the public to hide their guilt. The term was first used in the wake of a shocking accident in 1979 in which Air New Zealand Flight 901 crashed into Mount Erebus in Antarctica with the loss of all 257 persons on board. The aircraft was full of tourists on a sightseeing flight over Antarctica.
The New Zealand Government’s official accident report released by the Chief Inspector of Air Accidents cited ‘serious pilot error’ as the main cause of the accident. (Air New Zealand was owned by the NZ Government and was a flagship symbol of New Zealand’s national competence). As you can imagine, the loss affected a very large number of families in New Zealand and many of the bereaved felt that pressure had been brought to bear to deflect blame by misidentifying the true cause. Historically, dead pilots have always made a good repository for attributing blame.
Public demand led to the formation of a Royal Commission into the accident. The judge appointed to head the Commission was a Justice Peter Mahon (1923-1986). He produced his report in April 1981 – 17 months after the accident. He cleared the crew of blame for the disaster and found that the major cause was the reprogramming of the aircraft's navigation computer without the crew being notified. Mahon claimed that after the accident, Air New Zealand executives had engaged in a conspiracy to whitewash the original inquiry, covering up evidence and lying to investigators. Mahon concluded that they had told "an orchestrated litany of lies". His subsequent book, ‘Verdict on Erebus’ - an account of his inquiry, won book awards.
But the NZ Government officials & politicians would not rest – they subsequently appealed the matter in the U.K. Privy Council. (The archaic law at the time allowed them to take this ridiculous step). The British Privy Council effectively disallowed Justice Mahon’s findings on what could only be described as bullshit legal technicalities. Peter Mahon was subsequently hounded by ‘the system’ and retired from the High Court bench in 1982.
He died suddenly and prematurely in 1986 at the age of 62. Many in the airline pilot profession regard Peter Mahon as a hero – and suspect that he was hounded to his death. In 2008, he was posthumously awarded a Memorial Award by the Airline Pilots Association for exceptional contributions to air safety – “in forever changing the general approach used in transport accident investigations worldwide."
I tell you all this because there are lessons to be learned from the sad tale of ANZ Flight 901 about how government officialdom and politicians are already moving to deflect blame from themselves for the soaring ‘all causes’ Covid vax deaths. As just one example – the government authorities in Britain have a lot of explaining to do about what are now being described as ‘The Midazolam Euthanasia Murders’ of many 1000’s of old people in U.K. nursing homes early in the pandemic, and the false attribution of their deaths to Covid. But it appears that the British state is moving to throttle any real investigation. That ‘lack of interest’ has also been our experience here in Australia thus far. The only action available to us at the moment is to pressure our elected representatives into calling a proper inquiry. A good place to start would be the politicians who were in charge at the time.