THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: recommends that the federal government establishes a royal commission to examine the Australian response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The pandemic was a plandemic, the plan was implemented with so much support it was unbelieveable. Follow the money trail and see that everyone of those responsible was pocketing extra money or simply trying to keep their jobs or funding they receive. No doubt if it goes ahead we will hear a lot of "I cannot recall".
A RN came out in a chat with MGG and stated that alot of Dr's got shares in Pfizer.. she was working in a Melbourne hospital and they were actually saying it
Thanks for the breaking news. It's a first step, of course. There will be significant opposition to establishing a RC, as most members of the House of Reps will have a vested interest of some kind in keeping lots of things out of the limelight. Certainly the previous government members and also the present government members (many of who supported the federal government actions or whose colleagues in the states mishandled the pandemic). The argument that there are already enquiries, such as the PM&C inquiry is understandable, but shallow, especially given the poor choice of people leading the enquiry and the capacity of a RC to demand attendance. The state inquiries are problematic too, I think. But it's still a first step and I hope the next steps are positive. We have to hope that the matters are considered on their merits, not on party lines ... which may be wishful thinking. Fingers crossed.
Thank you for this. You try to tell family and friends until you’re blue in the face and they just won’t listen. Hopefully this new information will be of some influence.
Good point. If nothing else, this FINALLY might penetrate their thick skulls that there is legitimate cause for concern and need for enquiry.
We still have that entire dumbed-down cohort of society that won't believe anything until they see it on the news (which is ironic, considering "The News" is the very fox guarding this henhouse of criminality).
Great news, I hope a Royal Commission happens as the Government will avoid it at all costs. I can’t imagine the adverse events of the vaccines will be discussed at much length, it will all be about the procurement of the vaccines.
They could spend years before acknowledging and dealing with the vaccine harms. Quantifying vaccine harms should be the first item on the agenda for the royal commission, using data from insurance companies to determine mortality, disability and cancer diagnosis based on the number and timing of the shots with record-level or near record-level (for example, in year 2023, 39 people in the 30-34 age group applied for disability exactly 90 days after the second booster, 36 on day 91, 35 people on 92, etc.). Reproductivity should also be examined comparing those never injected with the Covid-19 countermeasures against those who received 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 8 or more of those injections by age group and comorbidity ranking numbers.
The inquiry should also examine the fraudulent “scientific” research papers and manufacture’s data that marketed the vaccines and demonized alternatives.
This request is too broad, and they could follow the British example of going nowhere for years. The tasks need to be ordered and time frames established, especially for publishing public reports.
Just an opinion; 1.we're still playing their game, 2.ALL sides of politics are in on it, fact. 3. Massive concessions will have to be made to get any traction if there is no backup supporters ( refer point 1.) 4. Royal Commission's make recommendations not orders, 5. Paid for by us, again, 6. "Can't recall" is a standard answer, 7. Who selects the commissioners?, 8. Limited chance of success unless access is granted to ALL of the National Cabinet Documents, unredacted. 9. Time factors, loss of momentum ( refer Hallett "inquiry") 10. Suggestion, ALL freedom leaders to arrange for ALL of their supporters & more to DEMAND this Royal Commission, NO concessions & get loud & angry about it. Make your own rules.
The sooner this News is shared Nationwide, the sooner all Australians can reclaim some Courage & some momentum, that Truth & Justice is & always will be ours.
Imagine how well this News will be received & Welcomed Worldwide.
These Big Pharma manufacturers of these mrna injections must Cease, taking affect immediately.
The report can be downloaded and is readable, although briefly touching on very many issues and summarising many submissions. Having skim-read it, I offer a few extracts that caught my eye (among many others):
Section 1.3: There was widespread support for the establishment of a COVID-19 royal
commission. Of the 559 submissions received by the committee, only three did
not support the establishment of a COVID-19 royal commission.3
Section 1.140: … The call for a royal commission is overwhelming.
Section 3.29 Dr Prasser similarly raised the importance of appointing independent and
neutral commissioners. He indicated one of the perceived weaknesses of the
Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry is ‘that its
membership is too much of an in-house group’.49 The IPA noted ‘two of the three
inquiry panellists appointed were well noted in the public sphere for being
enthusiastic advocates of lockdown policies in Victoria’.50 The Australian
Institute for Progress suggested it might be appropriate to appoint
commissioners from overseas to better ensure their impartiality.
3.38 It was noted that the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry
specifically excludes examination of the decisions and actions taken by state and
territory governments, and that this is a failure of that inquiry
3.87 The committee considers that there is an overwhelming case for the
establishment of a COVID-19 royal commission.
3.94 Whilst the committee has the view that the Commonwealth Government
COVID-19 Response Inquiry is structurally flawed, there are two observations
which should be made. First, the committee’s view is not intended to cast
dispersions upon those who are working on or are supporting the work of the
inquiry. No doubt, they will bring to bear all of their experience and skills to
maximise the outcomes flowing from the inquiry. Second, the committee agrees
that the matters included in the terms of reference of the inquiry should be
considered by a royal commission. In this regard, the committee has
endeavoured to incorporate each of those matters dealt with in the terms of
reference of the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry into
the proposed terms of reference for a proposed royal commission.
It's a start I guess (& I'm grateful to those who have moved it this far forward).
My criticism is that it's all operating on the basis that it was real, and legitimate.
In an ideal world we'd have a preceding foundational RC to establish the authenticity of whether any "novel virus" was even circulating at all.
I doubt there was with all the information coming out and the rollout of the jab, was before we even had the so called virus here..
Andrew Bridgen sums up the situation in Australia nicely in the UK parliament
The pandemic was a plandemic, the plan was implemented with so much support it was unbelieveable. Follow the money trail and see that everyone of those responsible was pocketing extra money or simply trying to keep their jobs or funding they receive. No doubt if it goes ahead we will hear a lot of "I cannot recall".
A RN came out in a chat with MGG and stated that alot of Dr's got shares in Pfizer.. she was working in a Melbourne hospital and they were actually saying it
Thanks for the breaking news. It's a first step, of course. There will be significant opposition to establishing a RC, as most members of the House of Reps will have a vested interest of some kind in keeping lots of things out of the limelight. Certainly the previous government members and also the present government members (many of who supported the federal government actions or whose colleagues in the states mishandled the pandemic). The argument that there are already enquiries, such as the PM&C inquiry is understandable, but shallow, especially given the poor choice of people leading the enquiry and the capacity of a RC to demand attendance. The state inquiries are problematic too, I think. But it's still a first step and I hope the next steps are positive. We have to hope that the matters are considered on their merits, not on party lines ... which may be wishful thinking. Fingers crossed.
Thank you for this. You try to tell family and friends until you’re blue in the face and they just won’t listen. Hopefully this new information will be of some influence.
Good point. If nothing else, this FINALLY might penetrate their thick skulls that there is legitimate cause for concern and need for enquiry.
We still have that entire dumbed-down cohort of society that won't believe anything until they see it on the news (which is ironic, considering "The News" is the very fox guarding this henhouse of criminality).
Great news, I hope a Royal Commission happens as the Government will avoid it at all costs. I can’t imagine the adverse events of the vaccines will be discussed at much length, it will all be about the procurement of the vaccines.
They could spend years before acknowledging and dealing with the vaccine harms. Quantifying vaccine harms should be the first item on the agenda for the royal commission, using data from insurance companies to determine mortality, disability and cancer diagnosis based on the number and timing of the shots with record-level or near record-level (for example, in year 2023, 39 people in the 30-34 age group applied for disability exactly 90 days after the second booster, 36 on day 91, 35 people on 92, etc.). Reproductivity should also be examined comparing those never injected with the Covid-19 countermeasures against those who received 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 8 or more of those injections by age group and comorbidity ranking numbers.
The inquiry should also examine the fraudulent “scientific” research papers and manufacture’s data that marketed the vaccines and demonized alternatives.
This request is too broad, and they could follow the British example of going nowhere for years. The tasks need to be ordered and time frames established, especially for publishing public reports.
Just an opinion; 1.we're still playing their game, 2.ALL sides of politics are in on it, fact. 3. Massive concessions will have to be made to get any traction if there is no backup supporters ( refer point 1.) 4. Royal Commission's make recommendations not orders, 5. Paid for by us, again, 6. "Can't recall" is a standard answer, 7. Who selects the commissioners?, 8. Limited chance of success unless access is granted to ALL of the National Cabinet Documents, unredacted. 9. Time factors, loss of momentum ( refer Hallett "inquiry") 10. Suggestion, ALL freedom leaders to arrange for ALL of their supporters & more to DEMAND this Royal Commission, NO concessions & get loud & angry about it. Make your own rules.
Thankyou for Sharing Ian.
Well this is News well worth knowing about.
The sooner this News is shared Nationwide, the sooner all Australians can reclaim some Courage & some momentum, that Truth & Justice is & always will be ours.
Imagine how well this News will be received & Welcomed Worldwide.
These Big Pharma manufacturers of these mrna injections must Cease, taking affect immediately.
The report can be downloaded and is readable, although briefly touching on very many issues and summarising many submissions. Having skim-read it, I offer a few extracts that caught my eye (among many others):
Section 1.3: There was widespread support for the establishment of a COVID-19 royal
commission. Of the 559 submissions received by the committee, only three did
not support the establishment of a COVID-19 royal commission.3
Section 1.140: … The call for a royal commission is overwhelming.
Section 3.29 Dr Prasser similarly raised the importance of appointing independent and
neutral commissioners. He indicated one of the perceived weaknesses of the
Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry is ‘that its
membership is too much of an in-house group’.49 The IPA noted ‘two of the three
inquiry panellists appointed were well noted in the public sphere for being
enthusiastic advocates of lockdown policies in Victoria’.50 The Australian
Institute for Progress suggested it might be appropriate to appoint
commissioners from overseas to better ensure their impartiality.
3.38 It was noted that the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry
specifically excludes examination of the decisions and actions taken by state and
territory governments, and that this is a failure of that inquiry
3.87 The committee considers that there is an overwhelming case for the
establishment of a COVID-19 royal commission.
3.94 Whilst the committee has the view that the Commonwealth Government
COVID-19 Response Inquiry is structurally flawed, there are two observations
which should be made. First, the committee’s view is not intended to cast
dispersions upon those who are working on or are supporting the work of the
inquiry. No doubt, they will bring to bear all of their experience and skills to
maximise the outcomes flowing from the inquiry. Second, the committee agrees
that the matters included in the terms of reference of the inquiry should be
considered by a royal commission. In this regard, the committee has
endeavoured to incorporate each of those matters dealt with in the terms of
reference of the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry into
the proposed terms of reference for a proposed royal commission.
Is this going to include the hospital murders in Australia from remdesivir/veklury and ventilator s of which they were monetised heavily for