TRUTH DAY QUESTIONS
Every Tuesday is TRUTH DAY. We will announce our Truth Day question here on the website and through our social media pages. You can then cut and paste the question and post it on the pages of your elected members and anyone else you want to ask. We will update our website each week linking the relevant research to each question so you can educate and empower yourself to have these conversations. You will also be able to send the question directly to your State and/or Federal members - straight from our website! The current question will always be on our CURRENT MP LETTERS page and you can access previous questions by clicking the link in the 'WRITE TO YOUR MPS' tab at each question.
-
QUESTION 53- 22/03/2022
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
I have a number of concerns regarding AHPRA.
1. Are you aware of the open letter sent to AHPRA (March 2, 2022) by lawyer Tony Nikolic and Senator Gerard Rennick regarding AHPRA’s deficient ‘whistleblower’ policy? See letter here - https://www.gerardrennick.com.au/are-sacked-medical-professionals-protected-as-whistleblowers-ahpra-is-on-notice/
2. Are you aware that the AHPRA policy stance is likely to stifle relevant public interest disclosures and discussion and debate with respect to both covid vaccines and alternative therapeutics, specifically as a result of the AHPRA edict issued to its members (March 9, 2021; see also e-petition to the Parliament of Australia EN3375).
3. Are you aware that AHPRA present themselves as a government agency by using the .gov.au domain publicly. As they are not a commonwealth agency, do you believe that this may be deceptive and misleading conduct? If an Australian private company did likewise, would they not be referred to the ACCC for investigation? Why would this not be the case with AHPRA?
Your response on these matters is very important to me and I would like to know your views as my federal representative.
1. Are you aware of the open letter sent to AHPRA (March 2, 2022) by lawyer Tony Nikolic and Senator Gerard Rennick regarding AHPRA’s deficient ‘whistleblower’ policy? See letter here - https://www.gerardrennick.com.au/are-sacked-medical-professionals-protected-as-whistleblowers-ahpra-is-on-notice/
2. Are you aware that the AHPRA policy stance is likely to stifle relevant public interest disclosures and discussion and debate with respect to both covid vaccines and alternative therapeutics, specifically as a result of the AHPRA edict issued to its members (March 9, 2021; see also e-petition to the Parliament of Australia EN3375).
3. Are you aware that AHPRA present themselves as a government agency by using the .gov.au domain publicly. As they are not a commonwealth agency, do you believe that this may be deceptive and misleading conduct? If an Australian private company did likewise, would they not be referred to the ACCC for investigation? Why would this not be the case with AHPRA?
Your response on these matters is very important to me and I would like to know your views as my federal representative.
Senator Gerard Rennick wrote to Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently to inform him that he will be withholding his vote from the Coalition Government until a number of issues are resolved regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
Truth Day Question 53 Research
-
QUESTION 52- 09/11/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) claims in its COVID-19 Vaccine Weekly Safety Report that “we have observed a higher-than-expected number of cases of myocarditis in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated individuals for Comirnaty (Pfizer)”.
There has been 456 cases of suspected myocarditis and 1,124 cases of suspected pericarditis. The youngest case reported was 12 years of age.
Meanwhile, the Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DEAN) shows 599 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis from 1-24 October 2021 for the COVID-19 vaccines, including one case where death was the reported outcome.
A study conducted in the US using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed that teenage boys are “up to six times more likely to suffer from cardiac adverse events (CAE) than be hospitalised with COVID-19” and that the “post-vaccination CAE rate was highest in young boys aged 12-15 following dose two”.
An Israeli study demonstrated that “compared with people who remained unvaccinated during the study period (from Dec. 20, 2020, to May 31, 2021), fully vaccinated individuals had about double the risk at 30 days after the second dose” of developing myocarditis.
A recent report from Renmark, SA, claimed that 13 teenagers developed myocarditis after their COVID-19 vaccination.
Children and young adults have almost no risk of dying from COVID-19, yet myocarditis has a 50% 5-year mortality rate. The TGA are currently considering approving the vaccine for 5–11-year-olds.
Are you aware that the risks of the COVID-19 vaccine outweigh the benefits in children and young adults?
Do you support the governments push to roll out the vaccine and put the health and safety of young people at risk?
Will you publicly support the halt of the COVID-19 vaccine roll out in children and young adults?
As a member of parliament, will you push to end all COVID-19 vaccine mandates and allow people the freedom to choose, as there is a clear and obvious health risk associated with the vaccine?
There has been 456 cases of suspected myocarditis and 1,124 cases of suspected pericarditis. The youngest case reported was 12 years of age.
Meanwhile, the Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DEAN) shows 599 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis from 1-24 October 2021 for the COVID-19 vaccines, including one case where death was the reported outcome.
A study conducted in the US using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed that teenage boys are “up to six times more likely to suffer from cardiac adverse events (CAE) than be hospitalised with COVID-19” and that the “post-vaccination CAE rate was highest in young boys aged 12-15 following dose two”.
An Israeli study demonstrated that “compared with people who remained unvaccinated during the study period (from Dec. 20, 2020, to May 31, 2021), fully vaccinated individuals had about double the risk at 30 days after the second dose” of developing myocarditis.
A recent report from Renmark, SA, claimed that 13 teenagers developed myocarditis after their COVID-19 vaccination.
Children and young adults have almost no risk of dying from COVID-19, yet myocarditis has a 50% 5-year mortality rate. The TGA are currently considering approving the vaccine for 5–11-year-olds.
Are you aware that the risks of the COVID-19 vaccine outweigh the benefits in children and young adults?
Do you support the governments push to roll out the vaccine and put the health and safety of young people at risk?
Will you publicly support the halt of the COVID-19 vaccine roll out in children and young adults?
As a member of parliament, will you push to end all COVID-19 vaccine mandates and allow people the freedom to choose, as there is a clear and obvious health risk associated with the vaccine?
Senator Gerard Rennick wrote to Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently to inform him that he will be withholding his vote from the Coalition Government until a number of issues are resolved regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
Truth Day Question 52 Research
-
QUESTION 51- 02/11/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet declared Monday 11 October 2021 as “Freedom Day” for the residents of NSW. On this day, residents were allowed to attend restaurants, cafés, bars, gyms, retail stores and so on. However, “Freedom Day” was only for those residents who were fully vaccinated.
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Senator Gerard Rennick wrote to Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently to inform him that he will be withholding his vote from the Coalition Government until a number of issues are resolved regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
These issues include:
1) A fit and proper compensation scheme for victims of vaccine adverse events.
2) The right for victims of adverse events to refuse a second vaccine shot.
3) No person in this country should be forced to lose their job.
4) Children do not need to take the vaccine.
5) All domestic travel restrictions regarding Covid should be repealed.
In his letter, Senator Rennick stated that “upon becoming a Senator over two years ago I made a pledge to serve the people of this great country, not destroy them. I cannot stand by while Australians suffer and do nothing about it.”
Do you support a proper compensation scheme for victims of adverse events? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for victims of adverse events to refuse all subsequent COVID-19 vaccines? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to work should they choose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine? If not, why not?
Do you support the immediate suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program for all children? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for people to be able to travel freely between states and territories regardless of their vaccination status? If not, why not?
As a Member of Parliament, will you stand with Senator Gerard Rennick and pledge to serve the people of Australia?
Truth Day Question 51 Research
-
QUESTION 50- 26/10/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet declared Monday 11 October 2021 as “Freedom Day” for the residents of NSW. On this day, residents were allowed to attend restaurants, cafés, bars, gyms, retail stores and so on. However, “Freedom Day” was only for those residents who were fully vaccinated.
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews suggested recently that booster shots may be required for those who are fully vaccinated in order to maintain their vaccination status, with booster shots potentially being required every six months.
Israel has already made it a requirement for individuals to have a booster shot in order to maintain their Green Pass, effectively banning more than a million people from participating normally in society.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky has stated that the definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ may change as booster shots are rolled out, and Singapore is already administering booster shots to those 30 years of age and older.
Deputy Chief Medical Officer Michael Kidd claimed that “antibody levels fall over time and there is a risk of breakthrough infections where vaccinated people may become infected and at risk of transmitting COVID-19 to others”, and that a booster shot “turbocharges your immune response”.
A press release in July from Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated that the government has secured an “additional 85 million doses of Pfizer, which brings Australia’s total Pfizer doses to 125 million”. This is enough to vaccinate the entire population five times over, and this doesn’t include doses of AstraZeneca and Moderna.
How often will individuals be expected to received booster shots?
Where is the research to prove that regular booster shots are safe and effective?
Will fully vaccinated people be banned from participating normally in society if they haven’t received their booster shots?
For those people who have had a reaction to their first or second dose, will they still be required to have a booster shot and further put their health at risk?
Given that the government has secured so many doses of the vaccine, it has obviously planned to vaccinate people on a regular basis. What is the long-term plan and why do people need to receive so many vaccinations?
Israel has already made it a requirement for individuals to have a booster shot in order to maintain their Green Pass, effectively banning more than a million people from participating normally in society.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky has stated that the definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ may change as booster shots are rolled out, and Singapore is already administering booster shots to those 30 years of age and older.
Deputy Chief Medical Officer Michael Kidd claimed that “antibody levels fall over time and there is a risk of breakthrough infections where vaccinated people may become infected and at risk of transmitting COVID-19 to others”, and that a booster shot “turbocharges your immune response”.
A press release in July from Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated that the government has secured an “additional 85 million doses of Pfizer, which brings Australia’s total Pfizer doses to 125 million”. This is enough to vaccinate the entire population five times over, and this doesn’t include doses of AstraZeneca and Moderna.
How often will individuals be expected to received booster shots?
Where is the research to prove that regular booster shots are safe and effective?
Will fully vaccinated people be banned from participating normally in society if they haven’t received their booster shots?
For those people who have had a reaction to their first or second dose, will they still be required to have a booster shot and further put their health at risk?
Given that the government has secured so many doses of the vaccine, it has obviously planned to vaccinate people on a regular basis. What is the long-term plan and why do people need to receive so many vaccinations?
Truth Day Question 50 Research
-
QUESTION 49- 19/10/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet declared Monday 11 October 2021 as “Freedom Day” for the residents of NSW. On this day, residents were allowed to attend restaurants, cafés, bars, gyms, retail stores and so on. However, “Freedom Day” was only for those residents who were fully vaccinated.
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Monday 11 October 2021 marked the beginning of segregation in Australia between those who are vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated.
This follows the vaccine mandates that have been enforced for residential aged care workers, hotel quarantine workers, education workers, health care workers, construction workers, police officers, truck drivers and more as a condition of employment.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has repeatedly stated that the vaccine will be voluntary, however it is becoming increasingly difficult for many people to function in society without the vaccine.
Do you support the discrimination of people who cannot or choose not to take the vaccine?
Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa for over 40 years.
In 2021, apartheid is a system of legislation that upholds segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia.
Do you support the division of Australian residents into two classes of people – the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?
Do you support medical freedom and the right to bodily autonomy?
Do you support coercion, discrimination and segregation, or do you support freedom of choice, inclusivity and unity?
Truth Day Question 49 Research
-
QUESTION 48- 12/10/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
In 2015, the Australian Government took the first steps to develop a digital identity system after a financial inquiry highlighted the benefits of digital identity for the economy.
On 1 October 2021, Minister for Employment, Workforce, Skills, Small and Family Business Stuart Robert released the exposure draft of the Trusted Digital Identity Bill and related legislative instruments for public consultation. The exposure draft stage is the third opportunity to provide feedback on the legislation.
One problem with the Trusted Digital Identity Bill is the absence of ‘no-impediment to service’ opt-out provision. If a routine government service could not be accessed without access to personal biometric data, this would preclude the exercise of free and informed consent about the use and sharing of such data.
Do you support a ‘no-impediment to service’ opt-out provision to be explicitly stated in the proposed Bill? If not, why?
Another problem with the Trusted Digital Identity Bill is the lack of clarity regarding ownership rights over the unique personal information contained in our bodies. Biometric information could plausibly be used to covertly modify, control or counterfeit our conscious agency, be used to access personal accounts, and be commercially exploited.
Do you agree that we must have clarity regarding legal ownership of the unique personal information contained or extractable from our unique biological characteristics? If not, why?
How will this Bill affect those who don’t have access to technology devices that support digital identity, such as the elderly? Will they effectively be cut off from society?
How does this Bill relate to the Privacy Act? What happens to those who choose not to consent to digital identity? Will they also be cut off from society?
As a member of parliament, do you support the Trusted Digital Identity Bill that takes us one step closer to the social credit system of communist China?
On 1 October 2021, Minister for Employment, Workforce, Skills, Small and Family Business Stuart Robert released the exposure draft of the Trusted Digital Identity Bill and related legislative instruments for public consultation. The exposure draft stage is the third opportunity to provide feedback on the legislation.
One problem with the Trusted Digital Identity Bill is the absence of ‘no-impediment to service’ opt-out provision. If a routine government service could not be accessed without access to personal biometric data, this would preclude the exercise of free and informed consent about the use and sharing of such data.
Do you support a ‘no-impediment to service’ opt-out provision to be explicitly stated in the proposed Bill? If not, why?
Another problem with the Trusted Digital Identity Bill is the lack of clarity regarding ownership rights over the unique personal information contained in our bodies. Biometric information could plausibly be used to covertly modify, control or counterfeit our conscious agency, be used to access personal accounts, and be commercially exploited.
Do you agree that we must have clarity regarding legal ownership of the unique personal information contained or extractable from our unique biological characteristics? If not, why?
How will this Bill affect those who don’t have access to technology devices that support digital identity, such as the elderly? Will they effectively be cut off from society?
How does this Bill relate to the Privacy Act? What happens to those who choose not to consent to digital identity? Will they also be cut off from society?
As a member of parliament, do you support the Trusted Digital Identity Bill that takes us one step closer to the social credit system of communist China?
Truth Day Question 48 Research
-
QUESTION 47- 28/09/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Victorian government released a communications pack titled ‘Promoting COVID-19 Vaccine Access for Students Aged 12+’. The pack contains the following information:
“Students aged 12 to 15 can book their own appointment and may be able to consent to vaccination themselves if the health professional assesses them to be a mature minor. This means that the health professional assesses that they understand the information relevant to this decision to be vaccinated and the effect of that decision.”
The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) states that “the age at which a person becomes an ‘adult’ in Australia is 18 years. Consent for the medical treatment of patients less than 18 years of age is generally provided by parents. However, there are circumstances in which patients under the age of 18 can consent to their own medical treatment.”
The COVID-19 vaccines are currently under provisional approval, the sample size is relatively small and is not sufficient for the detection of rare adverse reactions, the long-term efficacy and safety is unknown, the vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission is not known, and the vaccine efficacy against variants of concern has not been addressed. Furthermore, children have almost zero chance of dying from COVID-19.
Do you consider a child aged 12-15 to be capable of understanding this information, weighing up the benefits versus the risks, and making an informed decision without undue pressure, coercion or manipulation?
Do you consider a child aged 12-15 to be capable of making a major health care decision without being influenced by their friends, peers or educators in a school environment?
Given the lack of data and the rushed nature of the COVID-19 vaccines, do you consider that the precautionary principle should be applied, and do you consider a child aged 12-15 capable of understanding this concept in their decision making process?
As a member of parliament, do you advocate for children aged 12-15 making critical health care decisions with potential serious long-term consequences to their health?
“Students aged 12 to 15 can book their own appointment and may be able to consent to vaccination themselves if the health professional assesses them to be a mature minor. This means that the health professional assesses that they understand the information relevant to this decision to be vaccinated and the effect of that decision.”
The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) states that “the age at which a person becomes an ‘adult’ in Australia is 18 years. Consent for the medical treatment of patients less than 18 years of age is generally provided by parents. However, there are circumstances in which patients under the age of 18 can consent to their own medical treatment.”
The COVID-19 vaccines are currently under provisional approval, the sample size is relatively small and is not sufficient for the detection of rare adverse reactions, the long-term efficacy and safety is unknown, the vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission is not known, and the vaccine efficacy against variants of concern has not been addressed. Furthermore, children have almost zero chance of dying from COVID-19.
Do you consider a child aged 12-15 to be capable of understanding this information, weighing up the benefits versus the risks, and making an informed decision without undue pressure, coercion or manipulation?
Do you consider a child aged 12-15 to be capable of making a major health care decision without being influenced by their friends, peers or educators in a school environment?
Given the lack of data and the rushed nature of the COVID-19 vaccines, do you consider that the precautionary principle should be applied, and do you consider a child aged 12-15 capable of understanding this concept in their decision making process?
As a member of parliament, do you advocate for children aged 12-15 making critical health care decisions with potential serious long-term consequences to their health?
Truth Day Question 47 Research
-
QUESTION 46- 21/09/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Despite the COVID-19 vaccine being voluntary, many industries and businesses across Australia are mandating the vaccine for its employees.
National Cabinet announced in June that vaccination would be mandatory for all residential aged care workers from mid-September onwards. This followed vaccine mandates for those working in hotel quarantine.
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian announced last month that the vaccine would be compulsory for teachers from November onwards, whilst Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews recently mandated the vaccine for construction workers, giving them one week only to receive their first jab
Acting Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff announced recently that vaccination would be mandatory for health care workers in both the public and private sectors from the end of October, including allied health care.
Organisations such as Qantas and SPC have announced that vaccination will be a requirement for employment within their organisations, and a number of small businesses have also stated that it will be a requirement for entry into their business.
However, as recently as last month, Prime Minister Scott Morrison claimed that the government “are not seeking to mandate vaccines. That is not the government's policy, that is not how Australia has successfully run vaccination programs in the past.”
Do you support vaccine mandates in sectors such as aged care, hotel quarantine, education, construction and health care? What other sectors will the vaccine be a requirement for employment?
If the federal government have not mandated the vaccine, why are so many employees being pressured into taking the vaccine to remain employed in their current position?
If employees choose to resign or are terminated as a result of the vaccine mandate, what support or benefits will these employees be entitled to?
As a member of parliament, do you support mandatory vaccination or do you support medical freedom?
National Cabinet announced in June that vaccination would be mandatory for all residential aged care workers from mid-September onwards. This followed vaccine mandates for those working in hotel quarantine.
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian announced last month that the vaccine would be compulsory for teachers from November onwards, whilst Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews recently mandated the vaccine for construction workers, giving them one week only to receive their first jab
Acting Tasmanian Premier Jeremy Rockliff announced recently that vaccination would be mandatory for health care workers in both the public and private sectors from the end of October, including allied health care.
Organisations such as Qantas and SPC have announced that vaccination will be a requirement for employment within their organisations, and a number of small businesses have also stated that it will be a requirement for entry into their business.
However, as recently as last month, Prime Minister Scott Morrison claimed that the government “are not seeking to mandate vaccines. That is not the government's policy, that is not how Australia has successfully run vaccination programs in the past.”
Do you support vaccine mandates in sectors such as aged care, hotel quarantine, education, construction and health care? What other sectors will the vaccine be a requirement for employment?
If the federal government have not mandated the vaccine, why are so many employees being pressured into taking the vaccine to remain employed in their current position?
If employees choose to resign or are terminated as a result of the vaccine mandate, what support or benefits will these employees be entitled to?
As a member of parliament, do you support mandatory vaccination or do you support medical freedom?
Truth Day Question 46 Research
-
QUESTION 45- 07/09/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) recently banned general practitioners from prescribing oral ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.
The Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) states that the “data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover”.
“Numerous clinical studies – including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials – showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together… dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.”
The average reduction in mortality, based on 18 trials, is 75%, whilst a WHO-sponsored review suggests ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 mortality by as much as 83%.
“In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honoured the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world’s most devastating tropical diseases.”
Do you support the TGA’s ban on general practitioners prescribing ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 given the evidence? If so, why?
Do you support the TGA’s stance that “individuals who believe that they are protected from infection by taking ivermectin may choose not to get tested or to seek medical care if they experience symptoms”? Wouldn’t this also apply to those who are vaccinated?
Do you support the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship? Do you support the doctor exercising best practices based on his or her education, training, experience, knowledge and clinical skills? If not, why not?
As a member of parliament, do you support the overreach of the TGA and the refusal to examine and follow the current evidence on the benefits of ivermectin in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19?
The Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) states that the “data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover”.
“Numerous clinical studies – including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials – showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together… dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.”
The average reduction in mortality, based on 18 trials, is 75%, whilst a WHO-sponsored review suggests ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 mortality by as much as 83%.
“In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honoured the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world’s most devastating tropical diseases.”
Do you support the TGA’s ban on general practitioners prescribing ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 given the evidence? If so, why?
Do you support the TGA’s stance that “individuals who believe that they are protected from infection by taking ivermectin may choose not to get tested or to seek medical care if they experience symptoms”? Wouldn’t this also apply to those who are vaccinated?
Do you support the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship? Do you support the doctor exercising best practices based on his or her education, training, experience, knowledge and clinical skills? If not, why not?
As a member of parliament, do you support the overreach of the TGA and the refusal to examine and follow the current evidence on the benefits of ivermectin in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19?
Truth Day Question 45 Research
-
QUESTION 44- 31/08/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Australian Immunisation Handbook states that for consent to be legally valid, “it must be given by a person with legal capacity, and of sufficient intellectual capacity to understand the implications of receiving a vaccine”.
It also states that “it must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation” and that “it can only be given after the potential risks and benefits of the relevant vaccine, the risks of not having it, and any alternative options have been explained to the person”.
Are the risks, benefit and alternative options being explained to people who receive the COVID-19 vaccine in vaccination hubs?
It also states that “it must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation” and that “it can only be given after the potential risks and benefits of the relevant vaccine, the risks of not having it, and any alternative options have been explained to the person”.
Are the risks, benefit and alternative options being explained to people who receive the COVID-19 vaccine in vaccination hubs?
Truth Day Question 44 Research
-
QUESTION 43- 24/08/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Western Australian Premier Mark McGowan has made it mandatory for travellers entering Western Australia from New South Wales to show proof that they have had at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has made it a requirement for essential workers who need to cross into Queensland from New South Wales to be vaccinated.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has publicly supported these measures by stating that he thinks it is “very consistent with what the national plan is seeking to achieve”.
As my elected Member of Parliament, do you support such measures that removes the basic human right of freedom of travel should a person choose not to be vaccinated or cannot be vaccinated?
I urgently request that you support Craig Kelly’s ‘No Domestic Vaccine Passport’ Bill should it be debated in parliament. Will you stand with your fellow Members of Parliament who have publicly opposed domestic vaccine passports?
If you choose not to support the basic human rights of the Australian people, will you resign from your position as a Member of Parliament?
Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has made it a requirement for essential workers who need to cross into Queensland from New South Wales to be vaccinated.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has publicly supported these measures by stating that he thinks it is “very consistent with what the national plan is seeking to achieve”.
As my elected Member of Parliament, do you support such measures that removes the basic human right of freedom of travel should a person choose not to be vaccinated or cannot be vaccinated?
I urgently request that you support Craig Kelly’s ‘No Domestic Vaccine Passport’ Bill should it be debated in parliament. Will you stand with your fellow Members of Parliament who have publicly opposed domestic vaccine passports?
If you choose not to support the basic human rights of the Australian people, will you resign from your position as a Member of Parliament?
Truth Day Question 43 Research
-
QUESTION 42- 17/08/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Data from some of the most vaccinated countries around the world has shown an alarming increase in COVID-19 cases, including an increase in severe illness and hospitalisation.
In Iceland, 75% of the population are fully vaccinated, with another 6% partially vaccinated. During the fourth wave, two-thirds of those hospitalised at the National University Hospital were vaccinated, with over half of those in ICU also vaccinated.
In Singapore, 77% of the population is vaccinated, with 70% fully vaccinated. During a recent outbreak, 75% of cases were in those who were vaccinated against COVID-19.
The data in Israel is even more disturbing, with 67% of the population vaccinated and 63% fully vaccinated. 84% of cases in those over the age of 19 were in fully vaccinated people.
In a recent outbreak in Massachusetts in the US, where 69% of the population are vaccinated, 74% of positive cases occurred in fully vaccinated individuals.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), “the 50% efficacy threshold set for COVID-19 vaccines is because COVID-19 was deemed such a severe disease, that if a vaccine is only 50% effective, it’s still worth using.”
The data from some of the most vaccinated countries in the world now indicates that the vaccine is far less than 50% effective. Given this data, why do we continue to roll out a vaccine that is seemingly becoming less effective at preventing COVID-19?
Given the potential adverse reactions, particularly in younger people with myocarditis/pericarditis, how do the benefits outweigh the risks when these people can still contract COVID-19 and transmit it to others?
What are you doing as a member of parliament to demand a thorough investigation of the data and pause the roll out of the vaccine until this investigation is complete?
In Iceland, 75% of the population are fully vaccinated, with another 6% partially vaccinated. During the fourth wave, two-thirds of those hospitalised at the National University Hospital were vaccinated, with over half of those in ICU also vaccinated.
In Singapore, 77% of the population is vaccinated, with 70% fully vaccinated. During a recent outbreak, 75% of cases were in those who were vaccinated against COVID-19.
The data in Israel is even more disturbing, with 67% of the population vaccinated and 63% fully vaccinated. 84% of cases in those over the age of 19 were in fully vaccinated people.
In a recent outbreak in Massachusetts in the US, where 69% of the population are vaccinated, 74% of positive cases occurred in fully vaccinated individuals.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), “the 50% efficacy threshold set for COVID-19 vaccines is because COVID-19 was deemed such a severe disease, that if a vaccine is only 50% effective, it’s still worth using.”
The data from some of the most vaccinated countries in the world now indicates that the vaccine is far less than 50% effective. Given this data, why do we continue to roll out a vaccine that is seemingly becoming less effective at preventing COVID-19?
Given the potential adverse reactions, particularly in younger people with myocarditis/pericarditis, how do the benefits outweigh the risks when these people can still contract COVID-19 and transmit it to others?
What are you doing as a member of parliament to demand a thorough investigation of the data and pause the roll out of the vaccine until this investigation is complete?
Truth Day Question 42 Research
-
QUESTION 41- 10/08/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The (TGA) has granted “provisional approval” for the Pfizer vaccine in individuals 12 years and older. There have been zero deaths in Australia for those 19 years and younger.
Do you support the vaccination of children with an experimental vaccine with no long term safety data?
Do you support the rights of parents and children to choose not to receive the vaccine if the state governments decide to make it mandatory to attend school?
What are you doing as a member of parliament to prevent children from being vaccinated for a disease that is mild in almost all cases?
Do you support the vaccination of children with an experimental vaccine with no long term safety data?
Do you support the rights of parents and children to choose not to receive the vaccine if the state governments decide to make it mandatory to attend school?
What are you doing as a member of parliament to prevent children from being vaccinated for a disease that is mild in almost all cases?
Truth Day Question 41 Research
-
QUESTION 40- 03/08/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a statement recently that they will “withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only”.
Can you please confirm if the PCR test used in Australia is the same or similar to the PCR test that the CDC is requesting to be withdrawn? If so, will the PCR test be withdraw in Australia?
The “CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”.
Can you confirm that the PCR test used in Australia can distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses? If not, how is SARS-CoV-2 being differentiated from influenza viruses?
If the PCR test used in Australia is unable to distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses, the number of cases being reported as ‘COVID-19 cases’ is grossly inaccurate. The policies that have been implemented are therefore based on incorrect and misleading data. Can you confirm if the policies that have been implemented have been based solely on positive cases of SARS-CoV-2?
Why does Australia continue to use a cycle threshold (CT) of 35-45 cycles when the false positive rate is up to 97% at 35 cycles and above?
Can you please confirm if the PCR test used in Australia is the same or similar to the PCR test that the CDC is requesting to be withdrawn? If so, will the PCR test be withdraw in Australia?
The “CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”.
Can you confirm that the PCR test used in Australia can distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses? If not, how is SARS-CoV-2 being differentiated from influenza viruses?
If the PCR test used in Australia is unable to distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses, the number of cases being reported as ‘COVID-19 cases’ is grossly inaccurate. The policies that have been implemented are therefore based on incorrect and misleading data. Can you confirm if the policies that have been implemented have been based solely on positive cases of SARS-CoV-2?
Why does Australia continue to use a cycle threshold (CT) of 35-45 cycles when the false positive rate is up to 97% at 35 cycles and above?
Truth Day Question 40 Research
-
QUESTION 39- 27/07/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Kids Helpline has revealed that attempted suicide rates among Victorian teenagers skyrocketed by 184% between the months of December 2020 and May 2021, with teens aged 13-18 accounting for 75% of the total crisis interventions.
44% of Victorian emergency interventions were responding to a young person’s immediate intent to suicide, whilst another 31% of interventions were the result of child abuse.
During the second lockdown in Victoria, from July to September 2020, referrals to police, ambulance and Child Safety for children at imminent risk of serious harm rose by 46% compared to the previous three months. In March 2021, a child was calling for help every minute, with calls from children aged 5-9 rising by 80%.
Much of the country is currently suffering through further draconian lockdowns, with the evidence overwhelmingly showing that lockdowns do more harm than good.
What are you doing as a member of parliament to prevent lockdowns from occurring, and to protect our children from further harm and distress?
Why is the government continually locking down states and territories when the evidence shows that lockdowns cause financial and economic carnage, disrupt schooling, ruin small businesses, and create an unimaginable toll on mental health, with suicide rates sky rocketing?
Lockdowns were never part of Australia’s pandemic plan. Will you support the cessation of all future lockdowns in Australia? If not, why not?
44% of Victorian emergency interventions were responding to a young person’s immediate intent to suicide, whilst another 31% of interventions were the result of child abuse.
During the second lockdown in Victoria, from July to September 2020, referrals to police, ambulance and Child Safety for children at imminent risk of serious harm rose by 46% compared to the previous three months. In March 2021, a child was calling for help every minute, with calls from children aged 5-9 rising by 80%.
Much of the country is currently suffering through further draconian lockdowns, with the evidence overwhelmingly showing that lockdowns do more harm than good.
What are you doing as a member of parliament to prevent lockdowns from occurring, and to protect our children from further harm and distress?
Why is the government continually locking down states and territories when the evidence shows that lockdowns cause financial and economic carnage, disrupt schooling, ruin small businesses, and create an unimaginable toll on mental health, with suicide rates sky rocketing?
Lockdowns were never part of Australia’s pandemic plan. Will you support the cessation of all future lockdowns in Australia? If not, why not?
Truth Day Question 39 Research
-
QUESTION 38- 20/07/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
A study on the efficacy of ivermectin in the Journal of Biomedical Research and Clinical Investigations reported that not one person of the 788 people taking ivermectin prophylactically tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. However, during the same period, 58% of the 407 participants not taking ivermectin were diagnosed with COVID-19.
Another study involving Professor Thomas Borody showed that “ivermectin is a safe, inexpensive and effective early COVID-19 treatment validated in 20+ RCTs (randomised controlled trials)” and that “successful treatment was reached for all subjects”. No patient who accepted treatment required hospitalisation.
Emeritus Professor Robert Clancy has stated that we should “immediately establish safe and effective early treatment” protocols based on “overwhelming science” that include hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and that these treatments save lives.
The Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute showed that ivermectin stopped SARS-CoV-2 from growing in a cell culture within 48 hours. The evidence is unequivocal. Ivermectin is a readily available drug, it is safe and it is effective in the early treatment of COVID-19.
Why is ivermectin not being used as part of the early treatment protocol for COVID-19 in Australia?
Given the evidence, will you support the use of ivermectin for the early treatment of COVID-19? If not, why?
Will you support MP Craig Kelly in his push to make ivermectin widely available, and will you petition the government to stop suppressing effective early treatment protocols involving ivermectin?
Another study involving Professor Thomas Borody showed that “ivermectin is a safe, inexpensive and effective early COVID-19 treatment validated in 20+ RCTs (randomised controlled trials)” and that “successful treatment was reached for all subjects”. No patient who accepted treatment required hospitalisation.
Emeritus Professor Robert Clancy has stated that we should “immediately establish safe and effective early treatment” protocols based on “overwhelming science” that include hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and that these treatments save lives.
The Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute showed that ivermectin stopped SARS-CoV-2 from growing in a cell culture within 48 hours. The evidence is unequivocal. Ivermectin is a readily available drug, it is safe and it is effective in the early treatment of COVID-19.
Why is ivermectin not being used as part of the early treatment protocol for COVID-19 in Australia?
Given the evidence, will you support the use of ivermectin for the early treatment of COVID-19? If not, why?
Will you support MP Craig Kelly in his push to make ivermectin widely available, and will you petition the government to stop suppressing effective early treatment protocols involving ivermectin?
Truth Day Question 38 Research
-
QUESTION 37- 13/07/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Australian government released a confronting new advertisement warning about the dangers of COVID-19. The 30 second advertisement shown on free-to-air television depicts a terrified young woman struggling to breathe.
The advertisement has been met with severe public backlash, with many people calling for it to be scrapped immediately. Some have labelled it insensitive and distressing for those who may be suffering from COVID-19, whilst others have claimed that it is offensive when people in this age group are not yet eligible for the vaccine.
Numerous medical professionals have taken offense to the advertisement, stating that it is an insult to doctors and nurses, as they would never allow a patient to suffer or be in clear distress like that.
Dr Peter McCullough responded to the advertisement by saying that “COVID patients that are that young don’t have those symptoms” and that a life-threatening blood clot in the lungs can “cause someone to look just like what you saw in that picture – extremely short of breath, and extremely anxious… I would look at that video, and say, you know what, that’s not COVID-19, that’s actually a complication of the vaccine”.
Do you agree that the Australian government should be running a graphic advertisement campaign of this nature to scare the Australian public? If so, why?
Do you support the government’s fear mongering of COVID-19, especially towards younger Australians, who have a survival rate of 99.98% if under the age of 50?
If you agree that the advertisement campaign should be scrapped, what are you doing as a member of parliament to make this happen?
The advertisement has been met with severe public backlash, with many people calling for it to be scrapped immediately. Some have labelled it insensitive and distressing for those who may be suffering from COVID-19, whilst others have claimed that it is offensive when people in this age group are not yet eligible for the vaccine.
Numerous medical professionals have taken offense to the advertisement, stating that it is an insult to doctors and nurses, as they would never allow a patient to suffer or be in clear distress like that.
Dr Peter McCullough responded to the advertisement by saying that “COVID patients that are that young don’t have those symptoms” and that a life-threatening blood clot in the lungs can “cause someone to look just like what you saw in that picture – extremely short of breath, and extremely anxious… I would look at that video, and say, you know what, that’s not COVID-19, that’s actually a complication of the vaccine”.
Do you agree that the Australian government should be running a graphic advertisement campaign of this nature to scare the Australian public? If so, why?
Do you support the government’s fear mongering of COVID-19, especially towards younger Australians, who have a survival rate of 99.98% if under the age of 50?
If you agree that the advertisement campaign should be scrapped, what are you doing as a member of parliament to make this happen?
Truth Day Question 37 Research
-
QUESTION 36- 06/07/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
In 2020 the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared a global public health emergency based on a definition of a ‘pandemic’ that had been changed in May 2009. This new definition removed the necessity to show the severity of the disease to the population in all countries.
The original definition that had been used for many decades included the need for a new virus to be causing “enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses worldwide” before a pandemic could be declared. However, in 2009 this phrase was removed and replaced with “an increase in cases of a disease”. This is significant because the WHO could not have declared a global public health emergency in 2020 if this definition had not been changed.
Are you aware that this definition was changed in 2009?
It seems to me, if the majority of Australians were aware of this change in definition, we would be seriously questioning the actions of our government and the ongoing states of emergencies imposed upon us by the states and territories.
Can you please explain your perspective to me as my sitting member?
The original definition that had been used for many decades included the need for a new virus to be causing “enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses worldwide” before a pandemic could be declared. However, in 2009 this phrase was removed and replaced with “an increase in cases of a disease”. This is significant because the WHO could not have declared a global public health emergency in 2020 if this definition had not been changed.
Are you aware that this definition was changed in 2009?
It seems to me, if the majority of Australians were aware of this change in definition, we would be seriously questioning the actions of our government and the ongoing states of emergencies imposed upon us by the states and territories.
Can you please explain your perspective to me as my sitting member?
Truth Day Question 36 Research
-
QUESTION 35- 29/06/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
On 28 June 2021, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced that the COVID-19 vaccine will become mandatory for residential aged care workers, and that those workers are expected to have their first dose by mid-September.
This contradicts Mr Morrison’s comments in August 2020, when he stated that “it’s not going to be compulsory to have the vaccine” and that “nobody’s going to force anybody to do anything as a compulsory measure”.
According to the TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Report for the Pfizer vaccine, the longer term safety and duration of vaccine protection is unknown, vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission has not yet been addressed, a correlate of protection has yet to be established, and vaccine immunogenicity cannot be considered and used as a surrogate for vaccine protective efficacy at this stage.
As a member of parliament, do you support mandatory vaccination for residential aged care workers? If so, why?
According to the Australian Immunisation Handbook, a vaccine must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation. Do you consider mandatory vaccination to be free from undue pressure, coercion or manipulation? If not, why not?
What will you do as a member of parliament to protect residential aged care workers from mandatory vaccination and support their right to medical freedom?
This contradicts Mr Morrison’s comments in August 2020, when he stated that “it’s not going to be compulsory to have the vaccine” and that “nobody’s going to force anybody to do anything as a compulsory measure”.
According to the TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Report for the Pfizer vaccine, the longer term safety and duration of vaccine protection is unknown, vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission has not yet been addressed, a correlate of protection has yet to be established, and vaccine immunogenicity cannot be considered and used as a surrogate for vaccine protective efficacy at this stage.
As a member of parliament, do you support mandatory vaccination for residential aged care workers? If so, why?
According to the Australian Immunisation Handbook, a vaccine must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation. Do you consider mandatory vaccination to be free from undue pressure, coercion or manipulation? If not, why not?
What will you do as a member of parliament to protect residential aged care workers from mandatory vaccination and support their right to medical freedom?
Truth Day Question 35 Research
-
QUESTION 34- 22/06/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The ‘No Domestic COVID Vaccine Passports Bill 2021’ (C2021B00078) was registered and introduced on 21 June 2021 by Mr Craig Kelly.
“A Bill for an Act to protect the right of Australians to make their own health decisions in relation to COVID vaccination, and for related purposes.”
The Act gives effect to Australia’s international obligations, particularly under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (particularly article 12), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (particularly articles 7, 17 and 26).
As a constituent, I expect that you will vote in favour of this Act to protect the rights and freedoms of the Australian people.
Can you please confirm that as my federal representative you will vote in favour of this Bill?
If you choose not to vote in favour of this Bill, can you please explain why you have made such a decision?
“A Bill for an Act to protect the right of Australians to make their own health decisions in relation to COVID vaccination, and for related purposes.”
The Act gives effect to Australia’s international obligations, particularly under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (particularly article 12), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (particularly articles 7, 17 and 26).
As a constituent, I expect that you will vote in favour of this Act to protect the rights and freedoms of the Australian people.
Can you please confirm that as my federal representative you will vote in favour of this Bill?
If you choose not to vote in favour of this Bill, can you please explain why you have made such a decision?
Truth Day Question 34 Research
-
QUESTION 33- 15/06/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
In 1976, more than 40 million Americans received the swine flu vaccine during the swine flu pandemic. 25 people died following vaccination, and as a result, the vaccine program was consequently suspended.
In 2009, 30 million people in Europe received the H1N1 influenza vaccine during the H1N1 pandemic. 47 people died following vaccination, and another 1,300 people suffered from narcolepsy. The vaccine was subsequently removed from market.
At the time of writing, there have been 5,888 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the US, where typically 1-10% of adverse events are reported. There have been 13,867 deaths reported to European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Europe. In the US, more deaths were reported to VAERS in the first three months of 2021 following the COVID-19 vaccine than in the previous 15 years for all vaccines combined.
In Australia, there have been 2 deaths linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine, and many more reports of blood clotting disorders following vaccination. The vaccination program needs to be halted immediately.
Will you call on the Morrison government to suspend the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccination program immediately?
What are you currently doing in your capacity as a Member of Parliament to prevent injury and death following the vaccination?
How many deaths will it take in Australia and around the world for the program to be halted and the vaccines to be removed from market?
If you are encouraging Australians to take the vaccine, will you be held accountable should a person suffer from injury or death as a result of the vaccine?
In 2009, 30 million people in Europe received the H1N1 influenza vaccine during the H1N1 pandemic. 47 people died following vaccination, and another 1,300 people suffered from narcolepsy. The vaccine was subsequently removed from market.
At the time of writing, there have been 5,888 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the US, where typically 1-10% of adverse events are reported. There have been 13,867 deaths reported to European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Europe. In the US, more deaths were reported to VAERS in the first three months of 2021 following the COVID-19 vaccine than in the previous 15 years for all vaccines combined.
In Australia, there have been 2 deaths linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine, and many more reports of blood clotting disorders following vaccination. The vaccination program needs to be halted immediately.
Will you call on the Morrison government to suspend the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccination program immediately?
What are you currently doing in your capacity as a Member of Parliament to prevent injury and death following the vaccination?
How many deaths will it take in Australia and around the world for the program to be halted and the vaccines to be removed from market?
If you are encouraging Australians to take the vaccine, will you be held accountable should a person suffer from injury or death as a result of the vaccine?
Truth Day Question 33 Research
-
QUESTION 32- 08/06/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Channel 9 has rolled out an advertising campaign with well-known media personalities to encourage Australians to get their “shot”. The campaign starts with Scott Cam saying that “now we have a shot to get lives back to normal”.
Those in the advertisement claim that this is our “shot” to “protect our community”, “keep our borders open”, “explore the world again”, “keep live music alive”, “keep businesses open”, “keep people in jobs”, “keep healthy and safe”, “bring Australians home”, “get everyone together for Christmas”, and “help save lives”.
The “shot” does not provide immunity or prevent transmission. The clinical trials did not show statistical significance in terms of reducing severe illness, hospitalisation and death. There are no long-term safety studies, and the data is limited on those with comorbidities, pregnancy and breast feeding. There have been severe adverse events and death following the "Shot'.
How much have these media personalities been paid for the advertising campaign, and were they paid to take part in it? Was it part of their contractual agreement? Is their contractual agreement available to the Australian people and you as an elected representative?
Are those involved aware of the TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Reports for the Pfizer and AstraZeneca 'shot', as well as the significant risk factors associated with the 'shot'?
Have they been granted indemnity by the Australian government for deceiving and misleading the Australian public, and will they be held responsible should someone suffer from an adverse event or die as a result of taking the 'shot' as a consequence of their representations? Did these personalities undergo a training program to prepare them to make such representations that included an understanding of the risks to the public from following their representations and indeed to their own brands as celebrities?
Why are Channel 9 media personalities promoting the vaccine with no medical background or expertise, and coercing Australians into taking the vaccine so that they can get their “lives back to normal”. Is this really true since the 'shot' does not protect anyone from transmission?
Those in the advertisement claim that this is our “shot” to “protect our community”, “keep our borders open”, “explore the world again”, “keep live music alive”, “keep businesses open”, “keep people in jobs”, “keep healthy and safe”, “bring Australians home”, “get everyone together for Christmas”, and “help save lives”.
The “shot” does not provide immunity or prevent transmission. The clinical trials did not show statistical significance in terms of reducing severe illness, hospitalisation and death. There are no long-term safety studies, and the data is limited on those with comorbidities, pregnancy and breast feeding. There have been severe adverse events and death following the "Shot'.
How much have these media personalities been paid for the advertising campaign, and were they paid to take part in it? Was it part of their contractual agreement? Is their contractual agreement available to the Australian people and you as an elected representative?
Are those involved aware of the TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Reports for the Pfizer and AstraZeneca 'shot', as well as the significant risk factors associated with the 'shot'?
Have they been granted indemnity by the Australian government for deceiving and misleading the Australian public, and will they be held responsible should someone suffer from an adverse event or die as a result of taking the 'shot' as a consequence of their representations? Did these personalities undergo a training program to prepare them to make such representations that included an understanding of the risks to the public from following their representations and indeed to their own brands as celebrities?
Why are Channel 9 media personalities promoting the vaccine with no medical background or expertise, and coercing Australians into taking the vaccine so that they can get their “lives back to normal”. Is this really true since the 'shot' does not protect anyone from transmission?
Truth Day Question 32 Research
-
QUESTION 31- 01/06/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Victoria is currently suffering through its fourth lockdown since the beginning of the pandemic, having struggled through nearly 200 days of school and business closures, curfews, mask mandates, restrictions on travel from home, and unimaginable damage to the physical and mental health and wellbeing of Victorians.
There is no scientific evidence to prove that lockdowns are effective. The World Health Organisation's guidelines do not include lockdowns as part of their pandemic framework. No official government pandemic plan, including our own in Australia, involved lockdowns as an effective means of slowing the spread of a virus during a pandemic.
If lockdowns worked the first time, why do we need to continually lockdown time and time again, and if they didn’t work the first time, then why are we repeating the same mistake over and over again?
Do you support lockdown measures that severely impact businesses, disrupt school, affect people’s livelihoods, and increase the risk of domestic violence, depression and suicide?
If you support such measures, do you have scientific evidence and cost-benefit analysis to prove that they are more beneficial than harmful?
It is implausible to continue such draconian lockdown measures indefinitely. What will you do to make sure that Australians can continue to work as usual, businesses can continue to operate without disruption, and children can attend school as normal without the fear of another lockdown?
There is no scientific evidence to prove that lockdowns are effective. The World Health Organisation's guidelines do not include lockdowns as part of their pandemic framework. No official government pandemic plan, including our own in Australia, involved lockdowns as an effective means of slowing the spread of a virus during a pandemic.
If lockdowns worked the first time, why do we need to continually lockdown time and time again, and if they didn’t work the first time, then why are we repeating the same mistake over and over again?
Do you support lockdown measures that severely impact businesses, disrupt school, affect people’s livelihoods, and increase the risk of domestic violence, depression and suicide?
If you support such measures, do you have scientific evidence and cost-benefit analysis to prove that they are more beneficial than harmful?
It is implausible to continue such draconian lockdown measures indefinitely. What will you do to make sure that Australians can continue to work as usual, businesses can continue to operate without disruption, and children can attend school as normal without the fear of another lockdown?
Truth Day Question 31 Research
-
QUESTION 30- 25/05/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently declared that “all of those arrangements will have to be put in place” with regards to vaccine passports for domestic and international travel, and that “public health orders are the instrument that is used legally to prevent Australians moving from one state to another”.
The Australian passport “requests all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford him or her every assistance and protection of which he or she may stand in need”.
Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia states that “trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free”.
MP Craig Kelly will introduce a “no vaccine passport bill” to parliament to ban the use of vaccine passports in Australia, with a number of MP’s coming out in support of such a bill.
Will you support Mr Kelly’s bill to ban vaccine passports in Australia? If not, why not?
Do you believe that domestic and international vaccine passports should be introduced in Australia? If so, why?
Do you believe that vaccine passports are discriminatory and an invasion of privacy? If not, why not?
Do you believe that the government is coercing people into taking the vaccine by introducing vaccine passports? If not, why not?
The Australian passport “requests all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford him or her every assistance and protection of which he or she may stand in need”.
Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia states that “trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free”.
MP Craig Kelly will introduce a “no vaccine passport bill” to parliament to ban the use of vaccine passports in Australia, with a number of MP’s coming out in support of such a bill.
Will you support Mr Kelly’s bill to ban vaccine passports in Australia? If not, why not?
Do you believe that domestic and international vaccine passports should be introduced in Australia? If so, why?
Do you believe that vaccine passports are discriminatory and an invasion of privacy? If not, why not?
Do you believe that the government is coercing people into taking the vaccine by introducing vaccine passports? If not, why not?
Truth Day Question 30 Research
-
QUESTION 29- 18/05/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Victorian Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton recently stated that “we need to make a call on letting it (the virus) run”, whilst the former Deputy Chief Medical Officer Nick Coatsworth claimed that the “false idol” of eradication (of the virus) could not be maintained indefinitely.
Victorian MP Tim Wilson said that the country risked becoming a “hermit outpost”, whilst New South Wales MP David Sharma stated that there were “real and significant costs, economic and personal, to keeping borders closed”.
However, in order to re-open our borders, “we all need to step up to get vaccinated”, according to Professor Sutton. Dr Coatsworth said that “waiting is not a valid option either individually or for the public health”.
Do you agree that the majority of the population needs to be vaccinated for the country to re-open its international borders?
Many people have chosen or are choosing to not take the vaccine. Will this mean that our borders will remain shut until everyone is vaccinated? Will unvaccinated people be allowed to resume international travel when the borders re-open?
Do you consider the reopening of borders only if the majority of the community is vaccinated to be coercion, pressure or manipulation?
Victorian MP Tim Wilson said that the country risked becoming a “hermit outpost”, whilst New South Wales MP David Sharma stated that there were “real and significant costs, economic and personal, to keeping borders closed”.
However, in order to re-open our borders, “we all need to step up to get vaccinated”, according to Professor Sutton. Dr Coatsworth said that “waiting is not a valid option either individually or for the public health”.
Do you agree that the majority of the population needs to be vaccinated for the country to re-open its international borders?
Many people have chosen or are choosing to not take the vaccine. Will this mean that our borders will remain shut until everyone is vaccinated? Will unvaccinated people be allowed to resume international travel when the borders re-open?
Do you consider the reopening of borders only if the majority of the community is vaccinated to be coercion, pressure or manipulation?
Truth Day Question 29 Research
-
QUESTION 28- 11/05/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Prime Minister Scott Morrison was quoted recently as saying that there wasn’t “considerable clinical evidence that tells us transmission is preventable” following the vaccine.
Finance Minister Simon Birmingham was also quoted as saying that there were “uncertainties around aspects of the vaccine rollout including the duration of effectiveness of vaccines”.
The TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Report states that the “duration of protection is not yet known” and that “a correlate of protection has yet to be established”.
The Federal government has continually stated that the vaccine is safe, effective and free, yet senior ministers, including the Prime Minister himself, are claiming that the effectiveness of the vaccine is unknown.
Why are the COVID-19 vaccines being rolled out to the Australian public when the effectiveness of the vaccines is unknown? Do you support the experimental rollout?
If the vaccine does not prevent transmission, why are people being encouraged to take it to protect their loved ones and the community, when in fact it doesn’t?
What would be the purpose of a vaccine passport if the vaccine is ineffective in preventing transmission? Would you support a bill to ban vaccine passports?
Will you call for the vaccine roll out to cease immediately? If not, why not?
Finance Minister Simon Birmingham was also quoted as saying that there were “uncertainties around aspects of the vaccine rollout including the duration of effectiveness of vaccines”.
The TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Report states that the “duration of protection is not yet known” and that “a correlate of protection has yet to be established”.
The Federal government has continually stated that the vaccine is safe, effective and free, yet senior ministers, including the Prime Minister himself, are claiming that the effectiveness of the vaccine is unknown.
Why are the COVID-19 vaccines being rolled out to the Australian public when the effectiveness of the vaccines is unknown? Do you support the experimental rollout?
If the vaccine does not prevent transmission, why are people being encouraged to take it to protect their loved ones and the community, when in fact it doesn’t?
What would be the purpose of a vaccine passport if the vaccine is ineffective in preventing transmission? Would you support a bill to ban vaccine passports?
Will you call for the vaccine roll out to cease immediately? If not, why not?
Truth Day Question 28 Research
-
QUESTION 27- 04/05/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
The Morrison government recently enacted the Australian Biosecurity Act 2015 effective from Monday 3 May 2021 for citizens returning to Australia from India. The Biosecurity Act gives the government the ability to fine an individual up to $66,600, or imprison them for five years, or both.
Many people, including many politicians, are unaware of the powers that the government have with regards to the Biosecurity Act. Are you aware of these powers?
Do you support the Morrison government banning citizens from entering the country and fining or imprisoning them for doing so? If so, why?
What are you doing to help bring Australian citizens home from overseas, especially those who are stranded and vulnerable?
Many people, including many politicians, are unaware of the powers that the government have with regards to the Biosecurity Act. Are you aware of these powers?
Do you support the Morrison government banning citizens from entering the country and fining or imprisoning them for doing so? If so, why?
What are you doing to help bring Australian citizens home from overseas, especially those who are stranded and vulnerable?
Truth Day Question 27 Research
-
QUESTION 26- 27/04/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
With National Cabinet approving and releasing COVID vaccines to our elite athletes for the Tokyo Olympics, will you raise with the Health Minister that athletes should be fully informed including that the drugs are provisionally approved, awaiting data collection over 6 years , have no long term safety studies and are deemed in the experimental phases? Have the contents of these vaccines being cross-checked with banned substances for elite athletes?
Truth Day Question 26 Research
-
QUESTION 25- 20/04/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
When will members of parliament begin to listen to their constituents that are saying they don't want to receive a provisionally approved, experimental drug?
Instead, it seems the government is more interested in spending tax-payer dollars to fund further coercive measures such as vaccination hubs.
What questions will you raise in your party room and parliament in this respect?
Instead, it seems the government is more interested in spending tax-payer dollars to fund further coercive measures such as vaccination hubs.
What questions will you raise in your party room and parliament in this respect?
Truth Day Question 25 Research
-
QUESTION 24- 13/04/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Already in the early stages of this vaccine roll out we have seen the impact of lack of safety, as shown by the number of adverse reactions in those that have received the vaccine, and a potential lack of efficacy, as stated on the Department of Health website
The AstraZeneca vaccine is now suddenly not safe for people under 50. How can we be certain any of the provisionally approved vaccines will be safe for anyone? As you are aware, both the manufacturers of these covid vaccines and the government have blanket liability indemnity for any harm caused to individuals, what about all of the under 50s who have received their first dose of AstraZeneca? Do they get any protection given you have now stated the drug is not safe for them
Is the government going to withdraw its advertising and apologise to the Australian people for misleading them with statements such as ‘safe and effective’ and undermining the entire vaccination program? Any government advice is merely assumptions as the trials on these drugs do not conclude for years.Will you be advocating in your party room and parliament that this vaccine roll out ceases until safety and efficacy studies, both short and long-term are finalised? If not, why not?
The AstraZeneca vaccine is now suddenly not safe for people under 50. How can we be certain any of the provisionally approved vaccines will be safe for anyone? As you are aware, both the manufacturers of these covid vaccines and the government have blanket liability indemnity for any harm caused to individuals, what about all of the under 50s who have received their first dose of AstraZeneca? Do they get any protection given you have now stated the drug is not safe for them
Is the government going to withdraw its advertising and apologise to the Australian people for misleading them with statements such as ‘safe and effective’ and undermining the entire vaccination program? Any government advice is merely assumptions as the trials on these drugs do not conclude for years.Will you be advocating in your party room and parliament that this vaccine roll out ceases until safety and efficacy studies, both short and long-term are finalised? If not, why not?
Truth Day Question 24 Research
-
QUESTION 23- 06/04/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Covid 19 vaccines are experimental, according to Australia’s health minister, and have death listed as a possible adverse reaction. Do you see this as prejudicial, discriminatory and coercive? Is your party considering introducing such legislation into the federal parliament? If so, will you vote in support of a vaccine passport?
Truth Day Question 23 Research
-
QUESTION 22- 30/03/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Our First Nations people are due to have the vaccine rolled out in their communities this wee
The Australian government has not done a risk-benefit assessment showing that there is more benefit than harm to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations if they receive this injection that is being called a ‘vaccine’. Nor have they established the type of harm and in what frequency it will occur in this race of people
What action will you take, immediately, to ensure this potential genocide is stopped?
The Australian government has not done a risk-benefit assessment showing that there is more benefit than harm to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations if they receive this injection that is being called a ‘vaccine’. Nor have they established the type of harm and in what frequency it will occur in this race of people
What action will you take, immediately, to ensure this potential genocide is stopped?
Truth Day Question 22 Research
-
QUESTION 21- 16/03/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"Over the last week Congo and Thailand have joined many other countries that have now suspended the use of the AstraZeneca injection because of increasing cases of thromboembolic (blood clots) in those that have received this injection.Why is Scott Morrison continuing to support the AstraZeneca injection that only has provisional approval and is still undergoing clinical trials for safety and efficacy (as outlined by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA))?What actions are you taking as my representative to protect me and my family from this TGA provisionally approved injection with 6 years to collect data and large numbers of significant at-risk groups with no studies completed?"
-
QUESTION 20- 09/03/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
It is clear from the TGA’s Public Assessment Report into Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines, that the federal government's advertising of the Covid-19 vaccines is deceptive and misleading under the government's own ACCC measures of false and misleading advertising. The ads lead Australians to believe the vaccine is unconditionally safe and effective, which, according to the TGA's own assessments, is clearly unproven, particularly for some vulnerable people.
As my Federal member, are you aware of this misleading promotion of unproven vaccines? Do you support the Health Minister's actions? What measures are you taking, as my representative, in the Federal Parliament and your party room to hold the federal Health Minister and his public officials to account for their deceptive and misleading actions?
Your response is very important to me and will affect how I and others will vote in the upcoming elections.
As my Federal member, are you aware of this misleading promotion of unproven vaccines? Do you support the Health Minister's actions? What measures are you taking, as my representative, in the Federal Parliament and your party room to hold the federal Health Minister and his public officials to account for their deceptive and misleading actions?
Your response is very important to me and will affect how I and others will vote in the upcoming elections.
Truth Day Question 20 Research
-
QUESTION 19- 16/02/2021
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Covid-19 ads state only safe and effective vaccines will be made available to the public. By rolling out a TGA provisionally approved vaccine where their own Public Assessment Report leaves multiple efficacy and safety questions unanswered, how is this not misleading & deceptive conduct under the government’s own consumer advertising laws?
Truth Day Question 19 Research
-
QUESTION 18- 9/02/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
It has recently been reported that vaccine passports/certificates could be rolled out in Australia to allow those vaccinated more freedoms as a 'positive way' to encourage people to get vaccinated.
What are your views on vaccine passports/certificates and their potential for discrimination and division for those that reject the program due to the health risks associated with new experimental vaccines that have inadequate testing time frames?
Will you be in support for this?
Even though both Astra Zeneca and Pfizer have reported between a 62-95% efficacy rate, trials are still ongoing and not due to finish until 2023. There have also been many reports of high rates of side effects from the UK and US and the companies admit they do not know the long-term safety and efficacy effects of their vaccines which contain novel technology. The Australian Immunization handbook specifically states that consent 'must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation'. Would a vaccine passport/certificate mean that a person is pressured into an experimental medical procedure just so he or she can participate in society, for example travel or work?
What are your views on vaccine passports/certificates and their potential for discrimination and division for those that reject the program due to the health risks associated with new experimental vaccines that have inadequate testing time frames?
Will you be in support for this?
Even though both Astra Zeneca and Pfizer have reported between a 62-95% efficacy rate, trials are still ongoing and not due to finish until 2023. There have also been many reports of high rates of side effects from the UK and US and the companies admit they do not know the long-term safety and efficacy effects of their vaccines which contain novel technology. The Australian Immunization handbook specifically states that consent 'must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation'. Would a vaccine passport/certificate mean that a person is pressured into an experimental medical procedure just so he or she can participate in society, for example travel or work?
Truth Day Question 18 Research
-
QUESTION 17- 2/02/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
On 20 January 2021, the WHO adjusted the criteria for a person to test positive for SARs CoV 2 via the PCR test and recommended that adjusting the positivity threshold too high could increase the likelihood of false positive results.
They stated that the test is an aid and should be used in ‘combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information’. If clinical presentations do not match a positive test then a second test should be performed.
What is the Australian government's response to the WHO's updated guidelines, recommending managing cycle thresholds on PCR test so as to prevent false positive results especially in asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people? Is the Australian government following these guidelines?
They stated that the test is an aid and should be used in ‘combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information’. If clinical presentations do not match a positive test then a second test should be performed.
What is the Australian government's response to the WHO's updated guidelines, recommending managing cycle thresholds on PCR test so as to prevent false positive results especially in asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people? Is the Australian government following these guidelines?
Truth Day Question 17 Research
-
QUESTION 16- 11/01/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
Are you aware the WHO states that 'a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection'?
It also states: 'when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more - the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives'.
Could you please confirm the number of cycles we use for PCR testing in Australia?
It also states: 'when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more - the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives'.
Could you please confirm the number of cycles we use for PCR testing in Australia?
Truth Day Question 16 Research
-
QUESTION 15 - 8/12/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"The two leading vaccine candidates in Australia, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, are not due to complete their Phase III trials until 2022. Could you please explain to me why the Federal government is planning to roll out a vaccine in March 2021 before the completion of these very important trials?"
-
QUESTION 14 - 1/12/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"Are you aware that many of the diseases we currently vaccinate for were on a steep decline BEFORE vaccines were introduced for each disease? Are you also aware that there are a huge number of injuries associated with those vaccines? In fact, Australia is one of only a handful of western countries without a vaccine injury fund. Over $4 billion has been paid out in compensation in the US alone, proving vaccines injure.
Considering there is nothing more personally invasive you will vote upon as my elected representative, I want to understand what you know about the many vaccinations that a growing number of parents are feeling coerced into giving their children? As Scott Morrison is owning 'no jab no pay/play’ and saying a Covid vaccine will be as "mandatory as possible", what process are you using to independently assess how to best represent me when it comes time to vote? All I want is choice. Or are you just planning to follow your party line? Are you willing to vote against your leadership and party line if you join the nearly 90% of Australians who are saying they won't take this Covid vaccine?"
Considering there is nothing more personally invasive you will vote upon as my elected representative, I want to understand what you know about the many vaccinations that a growing number of parents are feeling coerced into giving their children? As Scott Morrison is owning 'no jab no pay/play’ and saying a Covid vaccine will be as "mandatory as possible", what process are you using to independently assess how to best represent me when it comes time to vote? All I want is choice. Or are you just planning to follow your party line? Are you willing to vote against your leadership and party line if you join the nearly 90% of Australians who are saying they won't take this Covid vaccine?"
- Schedule increase over time
- 1986 Act
- Increase in profits
- Diseases already declining before introduction of vaccines
- massive increase in childhood illnesses
- since introduction of vaccines there have been many cases of injury and death more than they have saved lives (polio/whooping cough etc)
-
QUESTION 13 - 24/11/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"Do you endorse the CEO of Qantas, Alan Joyce's announcement that all international travellers flying on Qantas ( the Australian airline ) will, in effect, be compelled and coerced into vaccinating in order to travel internationally? This is of particular interest given the outcome of recent A Current Affair poll suggesting that nearly 90% of Australians will not get the Cover 19 Vaccination."
- Qantas announced Covid -19 vaccinations would be compulsory for international flights
- A Current Affair ran a poll on their Instagram page asking who would take the vaccine for international travel and 89% of people voted NO
-
QUESTION 12 - 17/11/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"Can you please confirm that the Australian government, under the Australian Biosecurity Act 2015, that has been activated since March 2020 and is currently extended to December 2020, has the ability to fine me up to $66,600 or imprison me for up to 5 years for refusing the Coronavirus vaccination?"
- Biosecurity Act of 2015 (Cth)
- Section 92 - Receiving a vaccination or treatment
- Section 94 - Appropriate medical or other standards to be applied
- Section 95 – No use of force
- Subdivision C—Miscellaneous
- Section 107 Offence for failing to comply with a human biosecurity control order
- Penalty Unit Amount
-
QUESTION 11 - 10/11/2020
-
MAIN POINTS
-
RESEARCH
-
WRITE TO YOUR MPS
<
>
"In Australia, when a patient undergoes a medical procedure they are asked to sign a consent form acknowledging all of the risks and the procedure would not take place without this signed consent. One of the few exceptions to this, is vaccinations. Can you please explain the reason this is not done for vaccination procedures when the package inserts list hundreds of adverse reactions as a possibility? Do you believe patients or their parents/guardians should have all the associated risks clearly outlined, and sign to acknowledge those risks are understood?"
- Proven to be safe and effective is not informed consent. Risks not discussed.
- Informed consent for surgery to sign. Even if the doctor doesn't have time we need a piece of paper with ALL the risks. 200 adverse advents. Questions
- Effective does not necessarily mean it will protect people from disease
- List of adverse reactions
- Vaccines should be tested again placebos (inert) not other vaccines or vaccine ingredients
- Risk v Reward for whooping cough