Royal Commission New Zealand Submission

This is my Submission to RC NZ lodged in a hurry 27 April 2025 I'm you will typos because there is a lot of new info. Happy reading

 

Personal Profile & Background

 

I’m a former Queensland (Qld) SES deputy rescue leader. Additionally relevant to Covid19 I completed:- the welfare course (that incl. dealing with panic & managing an evac station); warden’s course (that incl. running recon in an emergency) & Smart State communication in marketing, TAFE & emergency communication courses. I’m a long-time senior bookkeeper & hold a 2017 DipAcc with the module for budgeting/forecasting. I modelled Covid19 in real time. My submission to Aussie Royal Commission lodged Feb 2021 on Covid19 was circulated initially by Sanjeev Sabhlok formerly of the Victorian Govt Finance & Treasury Dept who holds a PHD in Economics & Bachelor of Science Physics & Chemistry who deemed it “brilliant”. I have an IQ recently tested as 143 & received the result 5 in the 5x5 Australian govt uni entrance. I’m a dual citizen UK/Australian have NZ & Aussie ancestral family members & a father that married a Canadian. I’m a Commonwealth bitsa. I’m not a member or attached to any political party & a long-term swinging voter with no political ambitions. I have never promoted the purchase of any pharmaceutical product or saleable herbal supplement for Covid19. I have only ever suggested healthy unbranded antibacterial antimicrobial food & drink from things available in supermarkets, sunshine for vitamin D & free from the garden weed dandelion tea good for detoxing & improving heart health.  My research was at all times self-funded & I have never profited in any way from Covid19. I am a wheely amputee & my only motive is good health care. As a result of a personal health court case for my leg amputation I have been tested by psychologists & psychiatrists as mentally stable. I would be deemed in law a reasonable thinking person.  

 

 

 

NB: I have used both Twitters Grok & Google Artificial Intelligence as part of an experiment to see the benefits & limitations for use as a research assistant in compiling this submission. I have particularly used Grok to determine if my hypothetical concepts were plausible & rational within the context of information available to its much larger data bank.  Neither were used to influence the direction of my submission & most of the information & references had already been collated & submitted to govt inquiries prior to this submission. Where additional unique information to what I already had has been supplied by AI I will note the AI source within that sentence.

 

Terminology

1.                   I will refer to the alleged virus as Covid19.

1.a. One of the things that struck me was the incredible number of name changes WHO made for the alleged novel (or new) coronavirus in Covid19. It started off as “Pneumonia of an Unknown Cause” 5^th January 2020, changed to Coronavirus. Changed to nCov. And to SARS-Cov-2. This was used unscrupulously in the media as clickbait further inflating the alleged novel (or new) Covid19; 

 

1.b. Coronavirus mutates fast & almost always milder. Within a very short period the original alleged deadly superspreader would have gone replaced by a milder version. The threat though continued to be increased to the public because medical news reports were coming with coronavirus figures that did not relate to the alleged Wuhan novel (or new) strain. The common cold is a coronavirus & information that was circulated in the media regularly ignored that Covid19 was a specific novel (new) strain of a virus family with hundreds of strains;

 

1.c. When WHO ran out of names for coronavirus, we then had mutations to make it sound scarier - before inoculation contracts were signed that is. After they were signed, because pharmaceutical companies had to know the disease was recurrent & people injected were still going to get sick we got variants of concern. It’s a little hard to keep selling an inoculation to an 80% inoculated population if scary mutations were still around. The inoculations had to have been of benefit for something right…Right?;

 

1.d. We the were also subjected to regional sales marketing ploys like the India Strain (B. 1.617. 2). This was rebranded again after India complained about racism & we had WHO announcing the Greek alphabet & it was renamed Delta;

 

1.e. On social media different countries applied their countries hashtags. For researchers looking into the history & progression of the alleged Wuhan novel (or new) Covid19 deadly strain this added an annoying waste of time with searches spanning multiple different names that resulted in discarded irrelevant news articles far higher than the actual information – too many cooks spoiled the broth, but it was WHO that was causing the soup mix with its ridiculous cavalcade.  Politicians from one side of the globe to the other were using variant of concern releases or politics eg UK’s Hancock text messages revealing he was deciding when to announce variants of concern. Eg Australia, getting the Avalon cluster December 2020 in summer when summer of 2019/20 we had nothing. We had nothing because coronavirus mutates fast & almost always milder;

 

1.f. All the Covid19 name changes were a diversion to stop people concentrating on the novel (or new) coronavirus Covid19. If attention & research was on that then very quickly people would have woken up that coronavirus by nature mutate fast & almost always milder. The first pandemic, the original SARS 2002-4 that terrified the world had only 774 recorded deaths across 3 years & still around today nearly 25 years that they are testing for it. 25yrs later with plenty of samples it still has no cure. It is a coronavirus & it mutated fast & as almost always milder. It was declared contained. It was contained by its own nature of mutating milder.

 

 

 

 

Forward

New Zealand shared a trade bubble with Australia. Your govt & health depts went along with the quarantines, mandated inoculations for travel between our countries. Our Covid19 inquiries in Australia have been nothing but a corrupt sham to advertise the inoculation because big pharma is a generous political donor. Our Covid19 National Committee was acting unlawfully. Our inquiries have been rigged to only show a pro Covid view point. I have lodged to many other inquiries since.  Some of the information in this submission is from them & some is new based on my latest research. To date all of my medical calls & more have been proven 100% correct. I outed the behavioural psychology nudging cross country network over 8months before Mattias Desmet’s mass formation. My information on the Covid19 govt misinformation censorship moves as being politically motivated was submitted to the Inquiry on Social Media & Online Safety 7 March 2022  10months before the now famous Twitter files (https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=8eb3abfb-057a-4bb4-85c7-dedc9d111ca1&subId=720658). At some stage I will probably get something wrong, but in Covid19 sadly it hasn’t happened yet. I was warning about the myocarditis & pericarditis & all the other side effects in my Royal Commission Disability update lodged February 2022. Here we are more than 3 years later.

 

Like all my other submissions this submission will be uploaded for public consumption, because I do not trust govts anymore.

 

As a former Queenslander I watched on as the Covid19 Chief Health Officer Jeannette Young, wife of Prof Graeme Nimmo who has served as an advisor to Pfizer, was promoted to Qld Governor by Premier Anna Palaszczuk. It is my firm opinion Young known for no other contribution to Qld than Covid19, was effectively promoted for services rendered in poisoning Queenslanders & supporting the human rights abusive medical apartheid in Covid19. (https://www.couriermail.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=CMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.couriermail.com.au%2Fnews%2Fqueensland%2Frevealed-professor-graeme-nimmos-history-with-drug-company-pfizer%2Fnews-story%2Ffc488b086e6fb13c4126bf4bef82a8b8&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=LOW-Segment-2-SCORE).

 

Palaszczuk’s whose father Henri just by an amazing coincidence was involved in the formation of a company Genome Technology Alliance (GTA) for genome mapping mid 2019 with partners that include Hubei Mingde (Yes there is only one Hubei in China) https://news.marketersmedia.com/the-grand-opening-of-gta-gene-data-storage-and-application-summit-forum/88923219) went on after politics to another cushy after politics job. Incompetence, thievery & corruption are rewarded in Australia.

 

In Qld researchers anti-Covid rhetoric researchers are dead under mysterious circumstances. Eg The Trains allegedly terrorists headed by an alleged Christian anti-vax mandate sacked teacher going insane on their own property that supposedly was a mobile phone black spot at the time they were shot dead. Eg. The city of Warwick’s Steven Harrison the legally blind researcher shot dead based on false reports that he was a terrorist. People are starting to speak up across the world. NZ will have submissions that you want to dismiss because you think the stories are too bizarre. I am happy to go on public record with my information, because I have been fighting the evil in Australia for a long time now.

 

BehavIoural Insights & Nudge

Behavioural Insights Team UK was part of UK’s SAGE & Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviour (SPI-B). In questioning of Matt Hancock 10 June 2021, in the UK Coronavirus Lessons Learned inquiry, SPI-B are reported to have apologised as they “exaggerated and cooperated with trying to create a climate of fear beyond the evidence”.  Welcome to the tool Nudge! 

 

 

Note in Matt Hancock’s answer how he tries to hide the involvement of nudgers by referring to red green & amber lists instead of Traffic Light Nudge lists. It’s not EAST Nudge Attractive to find out public servants have been brainwashing citizens to go on their command at the speed of a traffic light changing.

 

Matt Hancock UK’s testimony at Q1401 validates that he was coordinating multiple countries coronavirus responses. The Red Green & Amber lists are indicative of a variation of Traffic Light Nudge being in play. Countries responses were being deemed by what colour list they were on Red Green or Amber. Every single day of Covid19 our Public Servants of multiple countries were checking what the traffic light list they were on for the day & locked into predetermined steps as to how they were going to treat their citizens based on what colour list they were on. Public servants are paid to act in our countries interests & when they don’t & that is harmful to our countries citizens that is treachery.  This link is Jacinta Ardern NZ announcing the introduction of the Covid19 Traffic Light System (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=852975198718296). NZ citizens nudge threatened “the more people get vaccinated the more freedoms”.  “Vaccinate” with a poorly tested medical listed poison or stay a prisoner.  All for anyone’s guess what foreign power.  I’m not seeing much National Defence in that.

 

I first heard the term Nudge being used in Australian Parliament House (APH) when a public servant (McNamara) used the term to explain why helpline phone numbers had been removed from Centrelink’s alleged Overpayment Account phishing letters.  Nudge seemed like an unusual term for a public servant to use (Nudge nudge wink wink) so I went digging. I found behavioural economists applying Nudge were being covertly funded (initial start up $8M) from Prime Minister (PM) & Cabinet. 

 

Govts across the world have been infiltrated by a network of behavioural Nudgers working with World Economic Forum (WEF) & World Health Organisation (WHO). In Australia our branch federally is called Behavioural Economic Team Australia (BETA) https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/. Behavioural Insight Team (BIT) UK works in UK’s cabinet. BIT UK is now part of NESTA https://www.bi.team/.   Australia’s State govts were also working with BIT.  8^th November, 2018, in Qld there was a joint AES & AMSRS Qld Symposium on behavioural insights (https://www.aes.asn.au/index.php?option=com_acymailing&ctrl=archive&task=view&mailid=1755&key=nrweJ2it&subid=-&tmpl=component&acm=_1755).   BIT UK in Australia started in NSW & spread. In New Zealand (NZ) the office is Behavioural Insights Team Wellington.

 

 

I have no formal psychology qualifications, but I don’t need them to call out Nudge. The tool Nudge evolved from the book of the same name co-authored by Cass Sunstein & Richard Thaler in 2008.  Despite propaganda marketing Nudge as a psychology theory. Neither of the authors have any psychology qualifications.

 

Cass Sunstein was a college chum of Obama. He was administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2012. In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) appointed him as Chair of its technical advisory group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences for Health. He is married to Samantha Power Administrator of United States Agency for International Development (USAID).  Power is a member of the Democratic Party & was an early outspoken supporter of Barack Obama. Powers was part of the Obama campaign as a foreign policy advisor. To be very clear WHO appointed a person that had no qualifications in psychology & with obvious political conflicts of interests to head up one of its key committees. Richard Thaler the co-author allegedly flicked from Obama to UK’s Conservative David Cameron. To be blunt he has all the feel politically of a chancer for his own financial interests, but appears to have bigger leans to Democrats.  

 

Thaler is acknowledged as one of World Economic Forum’s people (https://www.weforum.org/people/richard-h-thaler/). I note as at even date 27 April 2025, WEF’s founder Klaus Shwab resigned quickly & is currently under investigation for questionable handling of membership monies (https://www.politico.eu/article/world-economic-forum-investigation-klaus-schwab/). Thaler’s follow up book to Nudge was titled “The Making of Behavioral Economics Misbehaving” promo quote “Thaler's spirited battles with the bastions of traditional economic thinking” “Coupling recent discoveries with psychology”. (https://www.amazon.com.au/Misbehaving-Behavioral-Economics-Richard-Thaler/dp/039335279X).

 

I saw a photo while researching Robodebt where David Halpern the former Founding Director and President of BIT UK was passing a games baton to Tara Oliver former head of our BETA. That photo seems to have disappeared now from my Australian internet search.  Mr Halpern left BIT UK July, 2024.  Ms Oliver is still noted as employed by Australian Government as Deputy Head of Taskforce at Whyalla Steelworks doing anyone’s guess what. Whyalla Steelwork’s a privately owned company & was placed into Administration in February 2025 by the Labor State South Australian govt.

 

The picture below was submitted related to Rory Gallagher who heads up BIT units in Australasia in my update to Royal Commission lodged Feb 2022. “Rory led the establishment of the New South Wales Department of Premier and Cabinet’s Behavioural Insights Unit - the first Australian agency dedicated to applying BI to public policy. (https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/speaker/dr-rory-gallagher

 

 

This article from 2016 shows BIT now NESTA was co-owned by the UK Govt & its staff members. Staff members have a serious financial interest in making Nudge appear successful. (https://www.themandarin.com.au/71363-nothing-but-nudges-behavioural-economics-takes-the-public-sector-by-storm/).

 

Trump’s agenda building up USA was in total conflict with the WEF agenda of building up Europe. Trump signing the trade agreement with China and both bypassing the Trans Pacific Partnership pt a lot of noses out of joint. Trump's deal was agreed on December 13, 2019 and signed on January 15, 2020.  (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/15/trump-and-china-sign-phase-one-trade-agreement.html). China’s good friendship with Russia you don’t need to be a genius to know which way Russia would swing. You cannot have a one world government controlled by Germany if three of the world’s superpowers have their own deal going. Just a reminder that what controlled Germany’s last attempt at world control was the allies. Only initially France (who signed an armistice after about a month), Great Britain (supported by commonwealth countries), Russia, China & USA.  

 

 

It beggars belief with Sunstein/Thaler both lacking psychology credentials & the failed history of behavioural economics in health, that behavioural economists in countries other than USA would have any interest in buying into the Nudge rubbish for health.  A lot of our politicians though, have personal financial interests in trade & the share markets & banks that thrive from trade data.  Both NZ & Australia signed the TPP.

 

In my opinion, as someone that has done many communication courses, the closest semblance Nudge I had to another operational tool was persuasive marketing. So I put a direct question to Google AI & Grok3.  Both responded that my assertion was correct & unprovoked noted words to the effect that Nudge aims to influence covertly. The public mandates & medical apartheids dished out in Covid19 were most definitely overt, but overt or covert the application of the tool Nudge was flawed. It is a breach of human rights to coerce medical treatment.  Nudge was clearly being used in Covid19 as the appointment of Cass Sunstein to the WHO’s Chair on Behavioural Insight’s showed. That appointment also endorsed Nudge being used in Health during an alleged emergency. Repeating Nudge is not psychology. Its authors have no psychology degree.

 

 

If this had been the first occasion of problems with Nudge or was unique to one country then we could blame the worker. This occasion the tool Nudge has a woeful history. Whether covert or overt the simple fact is Nudge is a tool of coersion & breaches human rights on health.  When aspects of Nudge’s applications during Covid19’s first two years are considered, there is no doubt in most countries there was a gradual increase in coercive measures timed to suit the inoculation launches. Nudge in Covid19 showed a stark resemblance to replicating Stanley Milgram’s experiment to discover how Germans were turned into obedient Nazi murderers of Jews in WWII. The increase in mindfulness sessions were to induce states more conducive or self-hypnosis. Other measures like the censorship highlighted the negative reach of this tool. The ridiculous sea shanty songs with a rhythmic beat to replace chants added a further unreality to what was an appalling power over-reach. Tapper check in APPs were not just tracking people breaching privacy but were designed to replace flicking the memory wrist bands. All covertly applied.  Instead of restoring normality in individuals who have consented to be treated Nudge practitioners gave unethical psychologists in Covid19 a licence to behave very badly. 

 

My leg was amputated mid 2017 & most of the time I was in hospital I was in isolation. When I got out of hospital late October 2017 I never bothered tuning my tv I kept just continued listening to Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) radio. I remember one point in Covid19, people waking up were throwing & smashing their tv sets away due to the brainwashing.  You sit in front of a tv you need the sound & pictures & unless it is a repeat programme you concentration is focused on the set. My radio was always background noise while I was doing other things. I have wondered whether the lack of focus on media was why I didn’t succombe like others to the brainwashing.

 

 

Below is a Nudge picture that was circulated by Dr IM Mackay (Version 4.3).  Mackay was pushing the fear of Covid19 for his own interests in 2020.  Mackay was born in NZ & came here when he was a 16yo. Though he has deleted this diagram (which was his pinned tweet), it is still circulating globally on Twitter in other languages. One of its biggest fans is Eric Topol who has been pushing AI doctors & he circulated it with appropriate credit to Mackay (https://x.com/EricTopol/status/1327340528833183744/photo/1). Dr Mackay had poorly researched Covid19 symptoms. So badly in fact that he missed strong indicators that pneumonia was present. I corrected him, which warranted him blocking by me, after he sent a childish meme saying “You’re so Wrong”. At a later time the WHO Press Release 5 Jan 2020 Pneumonia of an unknown cause was available.  It showed the alleged novel Wuhan Covid19 cluster was first identied as pneumonia. October 2020 The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released mortality statistics on Covid19 that showed nearly half of people making up our death statistics had pneumonia. I was so right.

 

In Version 4.3 the person is the Controller & what the Controller decides means Go (like a green traffic light). A Nudge controller decides what he/she wants to achieve. Nudge divides people into two main groups compliant & non-compliant & then pursuades non-compliant to change their ways with ever increasing nudges.  Note the darker shading of the cheese for non-compliant vermin. Nudge assumes the compliant will blindly follow orders whatever they are told to do & that there are undecided fence sitters that can be easily nudged to join the compliant. It relies on peer pressure to do that & the use of politicians, media celebrities & trusted society groups to peer pressure a result. The ultimate aim is to reach a majority mass of compliant passively initially that will peer pressure non-compliant to be compliant once  critical mass has been achieved. At the opposite end from the Controller are the non-compliant. They get a swarm of airborne bacteria & a  traffic light red prodding stick to stop people making a run for it.  Whether you are compliant or non-compliant though, you (the public aka the vermin) are still held in the amber zone & played with by the dictating Controller. The only vermin truly fee of the Controller’s cheese maze, is the one ostracized by the Controller as Misinformation. The Controller has tabbed the different stages. It is very clear from those tabs that even if people ultimately move into the comply zone they are still subjected to increasingly punitive health measures.  It was always a one way street to the Covid19 inoculations & the removal of public liberties & freedoms that are human rights.

 

This tweet shows that from the very start of Covid19 24 Jan 2020 the Nudgers were geared up ready to attack people calling out the hoax. The tweet dated 31 Jan 2020 shows I had noticed my account had been under attack for week. My account had only about 1000 followers, most of which were Australians, because of my content. For the trolls & BOTs to have been active that fast Covid19 was a preplanned event with troll/BOTs ready programmed to target & attack people putting out data questioning the reality of Covid19. I have co-planned a full emergency unit exercise. It takes weeks. I knew this was a hoax immediately because the information feeds were all wrong.  The first thing was you do not create panic & if you see panic rising the last thing you do is encourage it. People had obviously recovered & yet there was no data. Wuhan has a population of 11+M so the low number of case numbers by 20 Jan 2020 without even picking up a calculator proved that natural immunity was robust.  There were too many missed opportunities to dispel panic.  Panic was being purposefully ramped up. I started dropping clues in my tweets that things were off.

 

Cheese is grown from bacteria. The Controllers biggest healthiest & smartest mouse leading the pack, is the one chowing down on bacteria riddled cheese. It is eating its way to freedom instead of jumping through the Controllers hoops. Psychology is the study of human behaviour. In Jan 2020, Covid19 was an alleged novel viral disease with no big pharma cure. Surely the first logical psychology step should have been to consult history before big pharma existed. Our ancestors clearly had answers we don’t have or we would be dead.

 

Western countries should have been looking to religion. Christian churches were the origin of our hospitals.  Our faiths’ traditions have evolved from centuries of churches wanting to reduce their patients & overheads. In the dead of winter we have Christmas. Christians know that is not Christ’s real birthday & that the period draws on a pagan history timeframe, but the child symbolises life in a winter period, when cold & flu deaths abundant. Consider Charles Dicken’s A Christmas Carol. It refers to the beverage The Smoking Bishop.  The Smoking Bishop was a variation on mulled wine & has roots all the way back to Hippocrates. The ingredients are full of antibacterial and antimicrobial ingreds. available at supermarkets. Other countries have developed their own traditional remedies to fortify in times of cold & flu. China was telling everyone listening, in March 2020, that it was curing its Hubei patients with lowcost Traditional Medicine not Modern Medicine.

 

This is Mackay’s Version 4.3.  4.2 versions proceeded 4.3 & all ignored the elephant sized block of cheese bacteria in the mouse maze.  Bacteria is all around us. Our bodies have evolved to survive the bacteria & develop natural genetic inborn immunities & antibodies to defend against newcomers.  Some bacteria is good for us eg Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. A communication amendment prompted Version 4.3 the addition of the Misinformation section. More versions were on the drawing board note the comment “changes lockdowns to stay at home orders”. Through all the amendments Mackay failed to see the obvious he was blind to the fact that people uninoculated against a superspreader were still alive.

 

As early as January 2020 the Queensland (Qld) Australia State government had created two groups “non-essential people” & “essential workers”. As a “non-essential person” (wheely for life amputee) I was told I had to “self iso” short for self isolate Jan 2020. The persuasion to do that was that if we didn’t follow orders & did not have an essential reason (no parameters given) we would get a fine of $1,334 which is more than the equivalent of a fortnights pension. We were locked up with poor food deliveries, no care & our allied health had also been affected. At a later time aged pensoners got a helpline phone, but at no time in the entire period of the Covid19 emergency did disabled people have a helpline phone number in Qld. On the first day of release midweek early in March I went to the shops to find people were literally brainwashed.  This was during the day. Not weekend or evening when workers would frequent a shopping mall. People had been brainwashed in their individual homes.  I saw people queueing up to walk all the way up a guide roped aisle that led up to a dead end turning round & walking past people on the way back not warning them it was a dead end. They all repeated the pattern & failed to see the obvious because they were blind.

 

 

 

Mackay was the Go green Controller in the Versions. The colour scheme shows it to be a Traffic Nudge plan. The steps & layout meet also EAST Nudge. Both of these were used in NZ.  https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project/policy-methods-toolbox/behavioural-insights.

When you consider the instruction steps you realise how low on the priority list this senior public servant had pegged advices to govt. The steps show that the more compliant vermin became, the more punitive the measures they got. He was the Controller & this was about a Controller keeping control at all cost. Nudge encourages people to make their own plans so they are emotionally invested in them & to try & avoid legal liability. Failed plans tugs on pride emotions. Mackay kept adjusting his versions with more future punitive steps to achieve compliant control. The same happened in Robodebt. They kept adjusting the computer & program with more & more money to show they had achieved something & hadn’t failed.

 

In both Robodebt & Covid19 people were blindly going through the motions. There was a tunnel vision mentality. The lockstep mirrored instructions across many countries encouraged the tunneled thought.

 

 

Mackay was one of the heads of Qld Health virology, but is “taking a break” since November 2024. NB: The Qld govt election saw Qld Labor voted out 26 October 2024.  https://virologydownunder.com/about-me/. 

 

 

I lodged to the Qld Human Rights Office in 2021. It was lodged just before the implementation of the 17 November 2021 Qld medical apartheid based on an alleged emergency of six (6) alleged Covid19 deaths (no mention of ages) in  period of over nineteen (19) months. I lodged a number of human rights complaints during Covid19 early years that excepting the automated lodgement receipt were ignored. There are no blind recruitments for senior positions vacant. Our agency & Commission heads are rarely blind recruitments. State & Federal they are all stacked Govt picks who use the public positions as a stepping stone & don’t give a damn about citizens.  Human Rights is a novelty in Queensland. It’s world famous for things like locking up children as young as 10 in prison & tying them to chairs with hoods over their heads. Qld got its Human Rights Act 2019 effective 1^st January 2020. The Act was designed to enable the removal of human rights in an emergency. Nationally Australia were ratified signatories to the International Human Rights (IHR) principles. Qld put a barrier between those rights with the human rights act that enabled override of all our human rights at s43 for an emergency health event.  Fast forward to 2025 an election year & we finally have had a paper from Australian Human Rights Commissioner Liberal Party plant & party faithful Finlay giving a lacklustre account of Covid19 human rights atrocities by Labor Party Premiers.  I guess without an election due my complaint about a health department that considered citizens as vermin & was about to launch a medical apartheid based on only 6 deaths in 19.5 months wasn’t newsworthy enough to deal with in 2021.

 

Mackay’s Version saw lockdowns were a welcolme addition to  health departments radars. The information was released this week by Liberals that the decision on their world beating lockdowns for Victorians was never prompted on health advice but solely at the behest of former Premier Dan Andrews. Andrews served a period 2007-2010 as Minister for Health. Above all other Premiers Andrews knew that overblown health events occur because he was Minister or Health during Swine Flu. Andrews knew the correct protocols & ignored them.  He was not alone though in the move on lockdowns. There was a Nudge network that was pushing the lockdown agenda across multiple countries. The were operating in our State & Federal public services & certainly in NZs too . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-04-20/melbourne-covid-curfew-foi-documents-health-advice/105194726. There was no science behind the lockdowns at all in Covid19. Early February 2020 I was tracking people nudging up the Covid19 panic. They were deciding what the response measures would be for their personal benefit.  This picture captures both the ridiculous elbow handshakes & the start of the push for remote work which resulted in the lockdowns. Other Nudged measures was the panic buying in toiletpapergate that hit many countries. @Shelhol was behind the start of that push. As these measures have all been scientiically debunked I have lost count of the number of times I’ve seen people say they don’t know where this or that measure came from.  I watched toilet people start & being Nudge progressed from February, 2020.

Note the @shelhol tweet I chose to respond. @shehol had been responding to a sock puppet BOT/troll @PneumoniaWuhan. This was a very early period & the information linking pneumonia was not being widely shared to the public at 9 Feb 2020. I picked up on the pneumonia link because of the symptom vomiting in a news article. It is my opinion this entity was on the inside of the Covid19 hoax & considering the @ASX interest it is a significant indicator that Covid19 response measures were being ramped up for the benefit of share traders.

 

Most people that use Social Media know about the Twitter files now. Few will know that :- pharmacetical companies & WHO, have been supporting Bot/troll farms to nudge:- 1. inoculation uptake; 2. targeted attacks on individuals that oppose Covid19 inoculations; 3. Defaming individuals making qualified comments as dangerous & insane; 3. Mask use without any science; 4. Vaccine passorts & digital identity’s; & happy lockdown individuals.  This is a link to a public submission I did warning govt that the censorships were Covid19 were targeted attempts to undermine our democratic elections. This submission https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=8eb3abfb-057a-4bb4-85c7-dedc9d111ca1&subId=720658. 

 

 

Here is Meta Facebook defaming me as a dangerous individual 3 May 2024. Reminder:- I am former Deputy State Emergency Rescue leader with numerous courses under my belt. At the time I obtained my Welfare Certificate I was one of only 10 people qualified to head up an emergency evac station in my super council region. I was nominated for Section leader by the Group Leader before I left for personal reasons. I was the second female in Qld to be a Specialist Flood boat crew member. I have passed numerous security checks for:-  my Rescue Service promotions; my former defence corps service, & being on a Super Council subcommittee for Heritage preservation. I have had tea with a former British Ambassador when I was short listed to work for the British embassy. My relatives have been assigned to protect the royal family. In a court case Meta defended the actions of its factcheckers by saying they were only giving opinions. My opinion is I was defamed by Facebook Meta as a dangerous individual instigated by a coordinated tag team of at best 90-minute trained fact checkers & I have the screen captures to show it.

 

 

   

 

Here is an example of Nudge fact checks. The TGA has consistently been rebranding Covid19 listed poisons as vaccinations in order to fraudulently persuade people to take them. When this was exposed, Reuters published a fact check in response to an alleged circular in order to get all legitimate posts on the topic like mine that included links to the govt webpage removed. I will be covering in much greater detail, further in the submission, why the alleged Covid19 inoculations were never scientifically  vaccinations.

 

In Covid19 Nudgers were actively pushing Telehealth, online pharmacies & the use of AI in health. It is why I have chosen to use AI in a research tool in this submission.  There is nothing the Big Pharma Nudgers wanted more than people being locked in their homes & frightened of going to doctors because they were pushing a move to AI health doctors. Pfizer is pushing for AI doctors because of course they can Nudge the programming towards AI’s eager to prescribe their products.

 

 

Some of the AI BOTs/trolls took on life like personas.  There is an extraodinary number that have died & taken leave of absences now that Covid19 has blown up in their faces. Nudge doesn’t fix its failures. Nudgers rebrand & kill off the old, because they have no real moral ethics or principles. Nudge is a tool of illusion sold to the highest bidder. It will be hard to know what & who is real, because as I will show they create fake sock puppet identities & have principles that belong in the toilet. One thing is constant they are hired guns – so follow the money. Start with why any Minister that is elected to be a Representative of the people, chose to sign contracts that brainwashed them to be representatives of their own agenda.  Nudge will never tell people that the way it gets statistitics that support its buyers aim is to bully compliance.

 

Nudge in itself was not novel (or new), because behavioural economics had been trialled in health before 2008 & it failed. A roundtable proceeding by the Productivity Commission was convened on the topic Behavioural Economics and Public Policy at the Sofitel, Melbourne on 8 and 9 August 2007 (https://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/behavioural-economics/behavioural-economics.pdf).  At Page 13 of their report there was a test case showing when some doctors were given a choice between two new medications (eg Moderna or Pfizer) it had a negative effect & it interfered with doctors’ judgement & they prescribed none.  Quote "Apparently, the difficulty in deciding between the two medications led some physicians to recommend not starting either." With that knowledge from a recognised trial, you would have to wonder why we were given a choice of 2x Covid19 vaccines if the object was really to encourage vaccine uptake.   

 

Thaler is an economist. If a business fails, they;- give it a new look; rebrand it; & relaunch it, to hide its past history. Behavioural Economics health was rebranded as Nudge only a year after the Productivity Commission roundtable. Quoting the New England Journal of Medicine, “Although behavioral economists have been drawing attention to health care’s choice architecture for some time,¹ to our knowledge, no nudge unit has been formed within a health care system.  In 2016, we launched the Penn Medicine Nudge Unit to systematically develop and test approaches using nudges to improve health care delivery.”.  (Para 6 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6143141/#:~:text=In%202016%2C%20we%20launched%20the,efforts%2C%20and%20disseminate%20our%20findings.). Penn Med followed it up with a Symposium endorsed with Sunstein thereat. https://ldi.upenn.edu/our-work/research-updates/report-from-the-first-national-nudge-units-in-health-care-symposium/.  No nudge unit had been formed, because research had indicated when it was called behavioural economics prior to 2008 that it was an abject failure.  That is the “Attractive” part of EAST Nudge. If at first you don’t succeed tweak & rebrand to hide your failures.

 

The medical research part of the Productivity Commission roundtable showed survival instincts had kicked in. The doctors showed they had keen hyper protective instincts & reverted to their primary instinct of “First do no harm”. Many have experienced the feeling of going into a room & something feels different. You might not know what has changed, but it has altered the feeling of the room. People with keen hyper protective instincts are keenly aware of those changes. In Covid19 doctors were already aware that there was an alleged emergency & had a lot of time to think about that & what could go wrong.  Freezing & instead of prescribing any of the inoculations, because they were unsure of the consequences for a poorly tested vaccine with unknown long term side effects was a rational hyper protective instinct. They opted instead to treat the symptoms instead of the disease & as the symptoms are exactly the same as colds & flu, with treatments they had successfully treated patients with before eg ivermectin. This was a perfectly normal response. Vaccinations are to prevent future illnesses not to treat a current patient with an infection.

 

I had no prior knowledge of the history of big pharma companies, but I knew the Wuhan virus was rubbish. What didn’t make sense to me was why big pharma only looked at making a vaccine. Covid19 was alleged to be a superspreader. It should have been obvious that if it was a superspreader it was already out well & truly uncontained. The Wuhan border only went up 23 Jan 2020 the disease had been allegedly out since December 2019. Why work on a vaccine at all, when by the time of manufacture of a sufficient quantity, people across the world would have already been infected?  Big Pharma should have been working on a cure to the infection not a vaccination from it.  It didn’t make sense, until I realised Big Pharma were involved with the fraud & had to be key players.  They were not working on a cure, because big pharma & govt health depts already knew Covid19 was no threat & people had “exaggerated and cooperated with trying to create a climate of fear beyond the evidence”.

 

When I considered the first responders & people most committed to standing up & fighting publicly Covid hoax & not nudged into silence they were mostly people who had survived or were from families that had overcome prior traumas in their lives & were seeking resolution.  This is a Quora link on why people became first responders https://www.quora.com/Why-did-you-become-a-first-responder. While there are a high number of generational responders there is also a high proportion of bloggers that had experienced a traumatic event that led to their becoming a first responder.  This makes them hyper sensitive to environments. In my case I am the product of three generation of first responders (fire/police) & had a friend had died of bronchial pneumonia at 18yo. There are also a high number of first responders that suffer from post-traumatic stress from the job. When I’d been in rescue a while I knew in the morning to pack my kit because a storm was going to hit that night & there would be a call-out.  If you ask a lot of first responders they will tell you the same thing. You develop an instinct & that instinct is hyper sensitivity.  My 3^rd generation genes told me to be methodical and follow protocols & govt orders. No amount of Nudges though was ever going to Nudge me quiet & risk human lives.

 

I put the suitability of hyper sensitive people to both Grok & Google AI and they are well suited. First responders have had their licences threatened, jobs stolen & offices raided by medical authorities for what should have been anticipated behavioural reactions.

 

The picture below is from a section that was part of my Royal Commission submission Part 2 (RC P2) submitted Feb 2021 pre the Covid19 inoculation roll-out.  I sent a copy of this to the Senate Covid Secretary. Doctors did not know the antecedents or the present because we have never had the full details on how the alleged novel (or new) disease started. How does a doctor tell the future when he or she is being compelled to dispense to a patient an inoculation that could not possibly have been tested for long term side-effects? They couldn’t.

 

As soon as a health emergency was called people were running in survival mode. While frozen by fear they were mentally in a child-like state looking for the guidance of a peer/mentor. Nudge includes peer pressure in its theories & like we do with children introduces to them to new rules those of the nudge controller.

 

 

 

Here is a screen shot from an Australian govt training session on Nudge BX2018. “1. People cheat less than what they can get away with; 2. People are more likely to cheat when it is their “last chance”; & 3. “Doing good can free people to be bad”.  That is the section on “Morality etc” where I would have been expecting a whole lot more than the public purse picking up the cost of giving our public servants a lesson in opportunies to cheat us more than they have been.

 

I went to look up Google search for a clearer screen shot of this frame above & unprovoked Google AI brought up an AI interpretation.  “While designed to improve choices, can also inadvertently create loopholes or opportunities for people to justify bad behaviour”. Are we seeing a problem with Nudges “Morality” yet?

 

 

While researching Nudge for Robodebt (https://www.9news.com.au/national/centrelink-robodebt-queensland-amputee-takes-on-centrelink-in-debt-case-and-wins/d5cd6adb-07c8-4834-a866-0aeb91b4ba8c), I realised that govt had been running Nudge in the federal health department from as early as 2017.  Brendan Murphy former Chief Medical Officer in Covid19 & now Secretary of Health ran a Nudge trial in 2018 (I believe, but cannot prove the Opioid trials started a lot earlier in 2017 in Qld). In 2018 a letter was sent to Australian doctors indicating that compared to other doctors they were overprescribing pain medications particularly Opioids to Nudge them to prescribe less.  When my leg was amputated, Opioids were the only thing worked for me & the Nudge trial was run in my primary 2 years of recovery. I can tell you they were not just sending out Nudge letters.  In Australia they implemented a system where doctors had to phone up to get permission to prescribe me my pain meds. This obviously extended the time of my medical consultations & as my medical consultations were part of a legal settlement ultimately means I picked up the costs for those extended medical sessions. Then there is of course the fact they breached the privacy of my medical consultation with another person & federal govt dept.

 

Here’s Murphy apologizing to colleagues because doctors with terminal cancer patients were targeted. https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/professional/australia-s-chief-medical-officer-responds-to-gp-q?feed=RACGPnewsGPArticles. When you look at the BETA PM & Cabinet webpage now & insert Opioids in their search box you do not get any results. Here is the PDF of the trial hidden on the Dept of Health website. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/04/opioid-prescribing-practices-project---key-outcomes_0.pdf.

 

The nudging for the removal of Opioids was lockstep global. It had absolutely no consideration of the application in different countries other than USA, because of course Nudge was straight from USA thanks to Sunstein & Thaler.  Australia’s Minister for Health from Jan 2017 to  May 2022 was Gregory Andrew Hunt. Liberal Hunt was a former Director of Strategy at the World Economic Forum (2000–2001).

 

Even as early as my submission to Senate Covid lodged 27 May 2020 I was questioning Hunt’s actions note section 2.3(c) therefrom.  In the lead up to Covid19 I had noticed something was seriously off with home defence.  Govt/Opposition had been introducing a whole range of measures that in terms of National Security were just bizarre. When they tried to rush through changes to Census just after xmas 2019 with almost no notice a few people sent me links & asked me to submit. They were planning to change the Census to try & get former & current soldiers to identify themselves on digital census forms that were stored anyones guess. The forms were going to computers that were being maintained by IBM who in 2016 were responsible for Australia’s Censusfail because they had subcontracted out the job. The optical character recognition required would have also involved foreign companies like Fuji Xerox. 5 Jan 2020 when I lodged was when Australia was in Bushfire Aussie & few people were in a position to lodge so I helped out.  I am no fan of former PM Morrison, but in fairness I think his multi-ministries was more about him knowing that something was seriously wrong with a few of his Ministers. Hunt & in fact Peter Dutton our current Opposition Leader who I’ll be discussing further were on the list of Ministries he chose to shadow.

 

The Nudging on Opioids was lockstep global.  This UK response to the nudging on Opioids dated 26 October 2017 is one of the few articles that BBC Canada put out on Opioids that I think puts a fair position. Referring to USA’s situation "Most insurance, especially for poor people, won't pay for anything but a pill," says Professor Judith Feinberg from the West Virginia University School of Medicine.  Dr Richard Frank is professor of health economics at Harvard Business School, & served in the Health Dept from 2009 to 2016, during President Obama's administration. "Physicians have received almost no training in pain management," he says. And "Until recently they have been under some pretty important misconceptions about how addictive various products are." The simple truth is most politicians do not care how addictive pharmaceutical products are because big pharma is their biggest donor.

 

I have seen a lot of propaganda about Opioids being addictive. I managed my Opioids well using less than prescribed. I have not renewed my scripts in nearly a year now, opting for paracetemol only when needed. Shortly after I got out of hospital I stopped using the morphine patches & also Lyrica which were doing nothing. I kept telling the hospital they were doing nothing & they kept increasing the dose. I continued using the Opioid Oxycodone & paracetemol.  No-one had a problem with me possible overdosing on the Opioid morphine.  I do not believe the threat of addiction to Opioids & possible overdosing as a result of an acquired addiction following medical treatments is genuine. I think it is more about supply problems.  I also think as a result of the intervention in health of unethical foreign behavioural economist with no medical or even psychology credentials we need to be looking at the effectiveness of all medications ourselves & considering the sources of supply. USA is allegedly doing that now with its MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) campaign. As USA are major manufacturers of pharmaceuticals, I have no doubt & would logically expect that the real outcome of MAHA will be in for financial interest of USA. I say this with no bias & have already declared my own experience with pain management my preference was an alternative to Australia’s morphine. This was because unless you are a dementia patient a tablet means you can take it when you really need it up to the required maximum daily dose & not automatically whether you need it or not like patches. https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/03/1161031#:~:text=%E2%80%9CHeroin%20and%20opium%20seizures%20are,a%20decline%20in%20opiate%20trafficking.’

 

There were 2 main “Behavioural Insight principles” running globally In Covid19. The first was EAST that was clearly involved in this nudge effort for Opioids as their project report shows. The BIT EAST acronym formerly stood for Easy Attractive Simple & Timely. It was rebranded to Easy Attractive Social & Timely. This should have flagged to everyone looking into using Nudge, that this was not a long settled health protocol & how changeable their principles really were depending on who was buying.

 

 

 

BETA was also running a project “Nudge vs Superbug”. You won’t know that unless you read all their reports. The front promo page of this project tells you interventions ceased 30 June 2017. Yet unpaid out of the goodness of their heart BETA continued to do regular updates - Yeah right!

 

 

There are very good reasons why citizens do not trust politicians & the public servants they appoint.

New Zealand (NZ) citizens will have had their own share of govt administration scandals. The following paragraphs of this section are not directly related to Nudge in health & Covid19. They are related to Robodebt & will give you real insight of how senior public servants react in an environment where Nudge is in use & they are the Controller.  Robodebt was agreed unlawful in Court November 2019 just before Covid19. It shows how parliaments are empowered to believe using Nudge they can “create loopholes or opportunities for people to justify bad behaviour”.

 

A whole lot of politicians & senior public servants have been exposed in Robodebt aka Data Match aka Compliance (rebrand rebrand rebrand) as being willing to rob a conceded 443,000 innocent victims.  Some people were falsely imprisoned for welfare fraud ruining their lives for ever. Some made homeless with forced repayments. Many driven to suicide. I was a victim of Robodebt, that fought back publicly putting the info out on Twitter. I self researched & self defended putting my research on my case out publicly on Twitter from the end of December 2017. I won at tribunal mid 2018.  All the allegedly independent reviews were purely intent on gathering criminal evidence against victims. All were instructed to find in favour of Centrelink at tribunal lev1. If you had a good case you won because if it went to tribunal lev2 the tribunal would have to publish the decision. https://www.9news.com.au/national/centrelink-robodebt-queensland-amputee-takes-on-centrelink-in-debt-case-and-wins/d5cd6adb-07c8-4834-a866-0aeb91b4ba8c. I was able to keep faults of the computer program in the tribunbal case (APH tried to keep them out).

 

 

In Senate Compliant (Robodebt) Hansard questioning of McNamara it was the Nudgers that had recommended the removal of helpline phone numbers. The Nudged repayments of what were poorly calculated alleged overpayments were later proven in court to be illegal debts.

 

My data match Robodebt letter was issued dated the same day I was released from hospital a new wheely for life.  I was still in hospital arranged home  nursing recovery & had to be taken to the hospital to prove I was an enrolled student at the time the govt was falesly alleging I was not enrolled. Though my data match Robodebt had been different from others after investigating the system I knew, I knew I had the ability to bring it down legally & possibly for everyone else innocent. I knew cause of my own physical state victims were being indiscriminately targeted that were in a poor position to defend. When I couldn’t convinve the under resourced legal aids, I risked an easy win for a much harder one. I chose to self research & self defend so I could get the information about the computer flaws into the tribunal as part of the initial Application.  I knew it would be unlikely  I would be successful in debating a barrister & that attempts would be made to divert the tribunals attention. As part of the original Application though, the points I wanted to get across were on file.  My alledged debt was for $5K+. I was willing to gamble my easy win for that as long as I could get my Application accepted. As the holder of a Diploma of Accounting with currency at the time I externally assessed the Centrelink system anyone could access my information & had the tested testimony of a qualified opinion for free.  The Member’s decision though made the win a special decision ruling. It was applicable to only me. I actually considered appealing my win, but in the end decided that it was a win & I had got mention in the Members decision of raising the faults & that I was a competent student (Diploma of Accounting). Mine was an early tribunal case & I had gone public. Further under the Social Services Administration Act section 8 Principles, the Secretary had to consider all tribunal winning decisions. 

 

Post the Court cases I become aware despite 443+K victims there only 76 winning tribunal cases because you don’t fight the proverbial city hall. The Secretary & Attorney General ignored all the decisions. They even ignored their own internal legal advices telling them it was unlawful. What shocked me more though was the compliance of even the tribunal. At 76 winning cases against a govt dept related to the same matter mention should have been made it to the Annual Reports. Its actions saw my case split without even notice to me. The tribunal had been Nudged.

 

I don’t know how many of those 76 cases went public like me & I suspect not many. Govt had been paying for a mass nudge propaganda media campaign branding everyone with a debt as welfare frauds.  They also publicly threatened victims that if the went public Centrelink would retaliate by breaching the privacy of their govt files. It was another nudge punitive measure that bounced off me. Though a private person I released my history before them, advising I’d been in defence, SES, & even was on a council sub-committee at one stage. I won’t cop being intimidated by crooks.  When the extent of the unlawfullness was being exposed they gave the Secretary the Order of Australia Medal to nudge up her peer pressure power.  The National Anti Corruption Commission was stacked & was later found compromised & is now being run again. https://www.nacc.gov.au/news-and-media/national-anti-corruption-commission-investigate-robodebt-referrals#:~:text=National%20Anti%2DCorruption%20Commission%20to%20investigate%20Robodebt%20referrals,-Media%20Releases&text=As%20a%20result%20of%20the,Commission%20into%20the%20Robodebt%20Scheme.

 

Public money the govt had stolen off us was used daily to defame us as welfare cheats, that even included ads on a digital billboard at my shopping centre) for years. When the breathtaking criminality of Robodebt was exposed & even after the Royal Commission there was a deathly silence. The media was nudged when the govt money ended.

 

Following my win I got no apology for my abominable illegal treatment that included being blackmailed into repayments while my debt was in review & I was still in medical recovery from a life changing operation. Shortly after my win the despicable scum in APH  tried to set me up for another overpayment Robodebt in an attempt to discredit me. I caught them in the act. Every year since then the monsters have pulled a stunt in order to mentally, physically & financially harm me.  Currently I’m waiting on a tribunal decision because National Disability Insurance Scheme has attempted to steal money off me.  There is no off switch for Nudge. If you fail to comply they continue to flag your file for abuse by all departments till you do comply or they drive you to suicide.

 

Section Conclusion:- Behavioural Insight/Economics Nudge is Persuasive Marketing & not a Psychology theory & as such should have no place in health systems of countries that have public health systems. Nudge in health is intended to be coercive & therefore undermines that uncoerced free will consent was given to medically treat. Victims of use of the Nudge tool were medical practitioners & patients alike.

 

 

COVID19 was an Overblown Threat & Fraud

You will receive a lot of submissions that say they spotted Covid19 was an overblown hoax immediately. A lot of peoples memories have been brainwash nudged. If there was anyone awake on Twitter in January & February putting out quality correct information I would have seen them. I was looking for them.  There was one person I think a science reporter that like me was calling out the utter bullsh*t being pumped out by Dr Eric Feigl-Ding 24 Jan 2020. He went quiet after the first day day. I kept going & have been fighting, recording & reporting since Jan 2020. I was a non-essential person. I had plenty of time to research as I was locked-up by Qld Govt. 

 

 

I modelled Covid19 in real-time correctly. I based my numbers on deaths & not cases. This tweet validates that from as early as 25 Jan 2020, I was calling out the low Covid19 death rates.  You will note from the tweet that I was referring to Covid19 as Coronavirus at that time. We were all referring to the alleged novel Wuhan strain as coronavirus in the early period. In hindsight, it is my opinion we were purposefully nudged to do that. A lot of unethical people in health did not want us to make the connection to pneumonia, which is how Covid19 really started.  You will note that I was using World Health Organisation (WHO)’s own Situation Report statistics right from the start. I included links in my tweets to my data sources & the WHO link is in. At the time I posted this link it was using WHO’s data from the 24^th Jan 2020 that was published on 25^th Jan 2020 (a day behind). The original Twitter link no is at the top giving the file number, but my Twitter account remains permanently suspended so a Commission order may be needed to verify it as valid.

 

The death numbers were ridiculously low.  Unlike many others that had their Twitter accounts cancelled I can still verify my screen capture of my tweets are genuine because I lodged most of them as part of my govt submissions State & Federal. The first of my govt submissions was to Senate Covid lodged 27 May 2020.  My tweets are as good as a diary entry if not better. Making 2 submissions a year on average they offer a timeline of information available in the public domain at points intime albeit with a lot digging.

 

Now the WHO Situation Report for 25^th Jan 2020 appears as being published on 25^th January 2020 (the same day). The number of deceased on 24 Jan 2020 is only 25. The number of deceased on 25 Jan 2020 is 41 deaths. There was not just a simple change in dates there was a complete fabrication of data. I was trying to model Covid19 using the WHO Situation Reports & it was impossible.  There were no WHO Situation Reports printed from 25 Jan to 27 Jan 2020. I responded to another tweeter who was commenting on the lack of reports.  I screen captured this tweet end of 2020 when my account was in review (30 Dec 2020) & I had to get it incognito, but the twitter link is at the top.

 

 

WHO was changing the date of its Situation Reports & data often, to ramp up the fraud.

The tweet to Grayson below on 25 Jan 2020 at 10.44pm late in the evening shows the data of 41 dead. The source I was using in this tweet was not from WHO, but by the link “channelnewsasia.com”. That is because WHO my first health reference point did not put out any WHO Situation Reports from 25-27 Jan 2020. WHO fraudulently went back created, changed & manipulated its own Situation Reports at a later time. WHO filled in the blanks after Bloomberg an online investor rag majority owned by Michael Bloomberg who was running for the US Democrat Candidacy for President & World Economic Forum Partner was putting out the data.  

 

All the people researching Covid19 like me January 2020 were searching for any info. All aptly had no WHO data, because WHO was not putting out Situation Reports 25-7 Jan 2020. All except one bunch that is. Those that were into Bloomberg’s online investor rag had no problems on a WHO dark weekend with coming up with the new info & even a specific number of 41 deaths. Bloomberg’s had an incredible crystal ball. Google search shows it was circulating the information of 41 deaths on 24 January 2020, but if WHO’s ever-changing data is to be believed those deaths had not even occurred yet. I recall in this period I was tweeting with a profile called Chris something, about his source being Bloomberg, because he was one of the few quoting 41 deaths as he trolled me. I had seen the numbers, but had not run with them on 24 Jan 2020, because there was no advice from WHO & nothing I could see in any Chinese newspapers. 

 

I will advise now that I am not an expert in share trading or stock but good ole common sense tells me that some investors getting a share market advantage from inside of WHO before the rest of the world on big pharma stock potential is not above board. In point of fact there were more than a few dodgy stock moves I saw happening in the lead up to Covid19. 18 Dec 2019 WHO put out its “Regional Situation Assessment – Seasonal Influenza 2019-2020” https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/influenza-situation-assessment-18-December-2019.pdf. had done an annual prediction of a nothing new flu season (but at that time Jan 2020 with Covid19 everything changed. In my submission I looked at 6 scenarios I believed would be considered by Senate Covid19 Committee for what I knew was a hoax & addressed the pros & the cons of the different possible theories. Here is the paragraph related to investments.

 

 

 

 

Per WHO’s Situation Report (now No.5), they only reached 41 deaths on 25 Jan 2020 based on “Data as reported by: 25 Jan 2020”) published on the 25^th Jan 2020. Bloomberg was putting out the data of 41 deceased on 24 Jan 2020, when by WHO’s Situation Report advices, that the deaths had not occurred yet. That is some crystal ball. I have provided a tweet & a corroborating tweeter that evidence there were no WHO Situation reports WHO filled in its data after the 27 Jan 2020 to match Bloomberg’s investor rag. Bloomberg rag has a majority owner Michael Bloomberg. At 25 Jan 2020 he was a Democrat Presidential Candidate runner.  Aside for his obvious connections to World Economic Forum (WEF) Bloomberg was a WHO global ambassador for non-communicable diseases. Covid19 was alleged to be highly contagious & ergo is not a non-communicable disease, however it is alleged to impact on non-communicable diseases. This raises a very big question, why was someone with an obvious financial interest in share trading even placed in a position where they may have been privy to information from a global health influencer like WHO before the rest of the general public.

 

In addition to recreating Situation Reports after the fact WHO was changing data within its reports to match Bloomberg’s data. I went back & looked at the WHO Situation Reports & realised WHO has gone through & been changing a lot of its dates to cover up the removal of entire Situation Reports eg 22 Jan 2020. WHO’s daily Situation Reports, when it published them, were published for a long time based on data from the day before.  What should have dawned on me earlier than it did was the act of WHO printing daily reports was in itself abnormal. This was a disease with only 6 deaths alleged after a cluster per Situation Report No 1 reported to WHO 31 Dec 2020. The daily reports of the 6 deaths started 3 weeks later with alleged cold & pneumonia symptoms in China’s cold & flu season. Even Ebola with an average 50% death rate only has weekly reports. We were getting daily reports on Covid19 because it inflated the media drama & the panic.

 

    

 

 

If you look now at Situation Reports 1 & 2 you will see that they are published one day behind the data within them.  Situation Reports 3,4 etc are published the same day as the data. I was trying to model Covid19 in real-time. I can tell you that is not what happened. The reports were being published from data a day behind for a very long time. You don’t delete a situation report or change its date, without giving a reason for the redaction in reports. A situation report is specifically to report a situation at a certain period in time.

The changes that WHO made, hid a full day of data for the 22 Jan 2020. 22 Jan 2020 was a crucial day in terms of WHO proving that human to human deadly transmission of the novel (or new) Wuhan strain reported to WHO China Office 31 Dec 2020 had occurred.  WHO Situation report No. 1 showed 6 deaths, but by Situation Report 2, 5 of the case files had been considered & 4 had serious comorbidities. They died with Covid19, but not because of Covid19. Comorbidities would have made any coronavirus including the common cold a risk factor.  So, by Situation Report 2 we had only 1 person that allegedly died of Covid19 & 1 unknown. By Situation Report 3, I would have been expecting to see the details of the 6^th case file, but it never surfaced. There is a change in the publishing cycle to hide that the 22 Jan Situation Report is gone. Further WHO archived the records into another location link.  Without the data WHO cannot prove deadly human to human transmission from the original identified cluster occurred from a patient zero.  What is clear from the date changes is there has been a fraudulent attempt to cover that up.

 

Some of the date change games by WHO have left footprints on Google searches.  Below are screen captures of my searches related to Situation Report 40. They show the dates were being well & truly gamed by WHO. In the early period we were told there was incubation & surface life of about 14 days. With first cluster presents reported per WHO Situation Report No 1 as 31 Dec 2019 that put the start date at mid Dec 2019. Cold & flu seasons have waves, with vulnerables presenting quickly & run for 90days. 29 February 2020 was 2.5months of a 3 month season when numbers would be dwindling. The end of Feb 2020 every man & his dog in the health departments globally should have been looking at the data.  If only to prepare monthly budgets. Did you hear anyone talking about the games with dates & missing data periods?  No!  No-one had been following the quantitative (actual historical) data. Everyone was buying into the exponential data rubbish being fed to them.

 

Trouble is though WHO, WEF & the UN did not factor in that Christian nations were going to oppose any changes to their Christian Gregorian calendar introduced by Pope Gregory VIII. The calendar has caused more than a few problems for the Covid19 hoaxsters. You might say divine intervention has been running rough-shot.  Just before the Covid19 games started, I had been looking at mistakes being made with Robodebt algorithm due to the February leap year factor.  With the exception of the first couple of WHO Situation Reports WHO was changing its own WHO Situation Report data to hide that Covid19 was no threat. However, they forgot about the leap year factor & other things & those changes were leaving telltale signs in various places in internet search engines.

 

 

Exponential modelling for Covid19 was total garbage & in fact I would doubt its use altogether is credible for a global health event. It requires a static unchanging field so that an even spread can be calculated.  Anyone that looked at the global population spread would realise that 9/10 of the world’s population is in a Northern hemisphere of many non-landlocked countries & only 1/10 of the world’s population is in the Southern hemisphere that is full of islands. With less people in our Southern hemisphere there is no way any contagious disease would spread at the same rate. Other factors examples levels of health care, countries border controls, climate (Covid19 was tested heat sensitive in Feb 2020) were also factors.

Locked down I did not have the access to resources or information health depts had.  I taught myself the bones of diagnostic medicine in a week &  I used the newspaper reports to get details of the symptoms so I could find a benchmark of a similar non-novel disease. How do you exponentially model a static health result when the alleged disease itself is not static & does not induce the same conditions like pneumonia in everyone. The alleged novel Wuhan Covid19 cluster was first notified in a Press Release by WHO as a cluster of “Pneumonia of an unknown cause” on 5 Jan 2020.  Though this information was not readily in public hands without a dig through files it should have been a known fact to anyone on the inside of health depts trying to model Covid19 that there were 2x health risk factors coronavirus & pneumonia to consider for modelling. Whatever the effects of Covid19 it is well known that pneumonia is more of a risk to the elderly & vulnerable.

 

 

Already with just the knowledge that pneumonia was involved, modelers had the information that the alleged Covid19 meant there would be vastly different by age levels of resistance to the two medical threats.  There was never going to be a consistent exponential spread through the population, because a population does not have people all the same age & all with the same level of health. When you think about churches, they were the ultimate champions in establishing a static field of immunity in their flocks.  Communion timed to be given at the same time & offering leavened breads reducing phytic acid & antimicrobial red wine to the impoverished every Sabath. The aforesaid winter celebrations & Easter to bolster health up to harvest time.

 

This is the CDC’s latest link on Covid19 symptoms today https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/flu-vs-covid19.html. Same symptoms, but allegedly some people can have a severe case of Covid19. As someone that nearly died in hospital post amputation in 2017 of good ole flu I’m happy to lay testament to the fact people can have a severe case of flu too. All we are left with on differences is “If a person has COVID-19, it could take them longer from the time of infection to experience symptoms than if they have flu”. We were told this was mostly an A-symptomatic disease with no symptoms. How would patients know. How would doctors know when symptoms had started when they turned up for a clinical diagnosis. They wouldn’t. How would anyone know how prevalent a novel (or new) disease’s reinfection would be if they were not laboratory testing to see if it was the same strain people were being reinfected with? They wouldn’t.

 

WHO stopped laboratory diagnosis of Covid19 & changed it to clinical diagnosis very early. WHO already knew before the end of the 90-day flu season Covid19 was not novel (or new). European Parliament’s Rob Roos’ questioning of Pfizer’s International Developed Markets shows their Covid19 inoculations were never tested for transmission. They were not tested for transmission, because as I will show WHO knew there was no person- to-person transmission of the alleged Covid19 novel virus. Hence there was a need to make the Situation Report data for 22 Jan 2020 disappear so others would not wise up quickly. WHO did not care if it had laboratory diagnosed positive cases of what was alleged to be a novel Wuhan Covid19. It only cared that it had a good show of a lot of cases in a short period of time that were deadly. In fact, even in its own Situation Report No. 1 WHO purposefully misled the world to believe there were 44 cases of the novel (or new) strain when it already knew 3 of those cases had been discounted (to be discussed further). This picture is my Facebook group’s banner. I am one of only a handful of anti Covid19 groups that rode out Facebook’s censorships & stayed public. After WHO changed diagnosis from laboratory to clinical diagnosis, they continued to add to the symptoms. By the end of 2020 even someone with a hangover could be diagnosed with Covid19.  Despite a lot of propaganda there were no novel (or new) symptoms that would differentiate Covid19 from any other coronavirus.

 

If Covid19 was the novel (or new) deadly super spreader alleged it is illogical that mass laboratory testing did not continue.  People can be infected with more than one coronavirus and in fact more than one at the same time. There are hundreds of coronaviruses, but would a patient that is infected both with the alleged novel (or new) strain and another fair worse. Could the same alleged novel strain reinfect the same patient or show recurrency at a later time which would void the ability for a vaccine to work.  Think back to school where we were taught cowpox vaccine is to cure smallpox.  The entire concept of vaccines is that you get a lesser more harmless dose of a disease eg given pox to teach your natural immune system strategies to defend itself.  The switch was done too early for a reason:- 1. WHO knew the patterns of the disease already, it was not novel at all & it did not need to dig deeper; or 2. They did not want proof of recurrency aka reinfection because it would void the plausibility of any vaccine working. If a person can be reinfected with the same coronavirus strain quickly, how could any vaccine designed to mimic the virus work & not also be recurrent. The simple fact is that what was preplanned was not a mass vaccination programme but a mass inoculation programme with what is really a listed poison.

 

The Australian Govt Senate inquiry was chaired by Opposition  Labor Senator Katy Gallagher. Despite me providing a correctly modelled Covid19 forecast (within 12 deceased for Australia’s first season) & making correct advanced med calls, my submission was rejected in November 2020 after my data was proven 100% correct. Accepted public to Senate Covid19 were submissions that gave false overinflated poorly modelled numbers & total rubbish data from financially compromised sources as I will show herein. I have no hesitation in going on public record accusing both the Chair & public servants assigned to manage that committee  & other Australian govts so called Covid19 inquiries of misusing public information with an intent to harm Australians’ health & the economy.

I released my Senate submission public 30 May 2022 when I found out Gallagher had been made Attorney General (AG) on 23 May 2022 & circulated it far & wide.  Gallagher was a former employee at the Community & Public Sector Union she should have been nowhere near the Senate Covid19 inquiry let alone chairing it, because of the public service’s clear involve. Her chair of the committee was corrupt. Putting that aside Gallagher had completed her studies by obtaining a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science & Sociology – no legal education. A month later 1 June 2022 AG Dreyfus was sworn as the new AG.  Dreyfus is another highly questionable Labor MP who covered up the depths of Labor’s involve in Robodebt & limited that Royal Commission to only a time that the Liberal National Party were at the helm. 

 

If you read my Senate Covid19 submission you will notice it was a clinical correct assessment of the Covid19 situation. You will see I provided them with the proof that Covid19 was being ramped up by fraudsters that were using highly questionable & illogical data. I supplied the Senate inquiry with correct data  at 2.1(c) showing an estimate in the picture at the bottom of the first box of 55 per 90 cold & flu season. https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2022/05/senate-covid-australia-lodged-27-may.html.

 

By Feb 2021 when I was lodging to Royal Commission Disability, I knew there was no doubt that Australian Parliament House (APH) personel were acting unconstitutionally against the interests of Australians & had been doing so all along. I can show the response measures “Saving Lives” was preplanned from as early as financial year 2018.

 

There were a number of changes that went through in 2018 that went unnoticed. However when you consider Covid19, the measures had key significance in how a pandemic of nefarious intent to harm by neglect could have been manufactured.  Examples include:- 1. Behavioural insights strengthening control in health depts & running “Nudge vs Superbug which was continued through Covid19 despite a project end date now appearing as 2017;  2. WHO changing recording of morbidity data so that influenza/pneumonia & other minor virals were split. This was allegedly because WHO wanted to look at childhood pneumonia, but resulted in comparison of Covid19 that included pneumonia to influenza that no longer included pneumonia as being unfairly tiled to make Covid19 appearworse than flu – it never was; 3.Atttacking of Opioids a controversial treatment for viral diseases to nudge doctors on the powers of ATAGI & AHPRA to remove their licences for prescribing medicines against their instructed guidelines. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4916179/; and 4. Removal of self help over the counter cold & flu meds containing codeine.  This had the obvious effect of limiting early intervention self help cold & flu medications. Prior to the 2020-2022 Australian Institute of Health & Wellfare study estimates of a small 6% of Australians had a substance abuse problem. Even at the inflated percentage the removal of self help cold & flu treatments from 94% of the population was bizarre & illogical. Limitations on the number of packets of paracetemol was made by supermarkets & pharmacies & the questions should have been asked why that could not also have been done for cold & flu meds. Most of these measures were lockstep matching other 5 eyes countries.

 

 

Many point to Event201 held by John John Hopkins October 2019 as a dress rehearsal. If we were to show the current year we would represent it as 2025 but how would we represent a decade. 2025’s decade is 202. There were many “Events” that led up to the Event of the decade 201.  The question is why was it pulled in 2019 the last day of the decade.

 

 

 

 

Eg. Event2017	Eg. Event2018  https://www.nejmgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/apr2018.pdf
Eg. Event2019	Eg. Event 2019

 

A lot of focus has been placed on children because of the psychological harms to them. I am vulnerable by disability, but I kept thinking about the psychological harm being done to people in their 80’s, refugees from war zones even vets all through Covid19.  It was not just those in residential care. Australia like NZ has a high population of English & European citizens in their 80’s. Measures being nudged up were psychologically harmful. They would have experienced WWII as children with rationing. Vulnerables in Qld “self-iso” were not just being starved through inadequate food deliveries. In Australia they were encouraging people to bang pots & pans out their windows as the sun set for “essential” workers. For the elderly, refugees & disabled war vets, that would have sounded like bombs dropping. In UK they encouraged people to look & clap the sky of a night time when their ”essential” workers came home. For the elderly that would have done as children watching the sky for bombers. NZ adopted both of these practices & they also got plenty of zombie press like USA to remind them death was all around them.

 

 

 

 

 

Free Speech Attrocities & Political treachery & treason rebranded as Misinformation

My Twitter account was suspended permanently 30 Dec 2020, but prior to that occuring I had internet incognito screen captured key tweets that show Covid19 was a hoax & of who was ramping up that hoax on Twitter in Jan/Feb 2020.  My Twitter account was suspended, because a US Republican Senator Ron Johnson had picked up on my tweets & ran with my end of 2020 data.  The data souces were straight from Worlth Health Organisation & Our World Data & I made sure the calculation method was crystal clear. The tweet showed that Covid19 was not even close to being the threat it was being made out to be.  I had to rebuild the data so I could publish it on other social media websites when I lost a non-existent Twitter suspension review.

Australia did not have a single source of truth we had the illuson of a free speech & 3x fact checkers in Covid19:-

1.      The first factchecker was RMITABC. RMITABC was a partnership between Australia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) which is a public owned entity and our emergency public communicator &  Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT). ABC showed its strong political bias for Labor when it provided Bananas in Pyjamas for an election campaign. RMIT has had $$$M of grants from Victorian Labor including a very specific grant that bought a lot of online Covid19 kumbaya moments. A stipulated part of a 44.6M grant was to cover “A Digital Infrastructure and the Digital CBD project focused on the ways COVID-19 has accelerated adoption of digital technology and reshaped Victoria’s geography”.  RMIT & ABC formed a partnership as RMITABC Factchecking & were one of three only factchecking sources used as Australia’s single source of truth on social media. I’ll be referring to ABC again.

 

It should be a no brainer that when a million people go to Canberra’s Epic Park from all parts of Australia peacefully begging the Governor General to “Sack them all” & are fired upon by Australian Federal Police (AFP) using long range acoustic weapons that this would see some attention from main stream media & on social media. About 10% of my friends from an in real life protest group Stand in the Park that was comprised of mostly teachers & nurses sacked from jab mandates went & they confirmed the size of the crowd. I saw the burns on the faces of friends when they returned. Factchecked false by a 90min trained RMITABC Coronacheck who took the opportunity to do another hatchet job on Luc Montagnier underneath https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-18/coronacheck-sonic-weapons-lrad-police-canberra-protests/100839612.  At a later time there was a grudging admission they were used but the effects were not the usual effects of LRAD. ABC is Australia’s public purse funded emergency news & media station. We had better news from Russian Television International. What does that say about media? What does it say about how much our security has been degraded?  https://canberradaily.com.au/whats-an-lrad-explaining-the-sonic-weapons-police-use-for-crowd-control-and-communication/.

Because I no longer trust anything I looked up Luc Montagnier using Artificial Intelligence (AI) hoping to get a straight answer to something in case he was yet another brainwash nudge. My result brought a result to consult a corrupt ABC. I followed the links as below & my first option led me to his ABC Obituary. It is a disgraceful piece of slime reporting without any sense of humanity. I can only imagine the pain this caused Montagnier’s family & as a real quiet Australian I apologize deeply to them. The fact this piece of trash is still there with all the information out now says everything about APH. In Covid19 they censored all the information that was correct as misinformation unconstitutionally because that is the Nudge thing to do. Now they have the information it was not misinformation they have done nothing to clean up their mess because they are all Uniparty plants  & the parties that put them where they are, are both corruptly involved. This has been day in day out for over 5yrs it is not Battleground Melbourne it is Battleground Australia.

 

 

1.      The second fact check was the  Conversation Australia whose fact check assessor is American. In fairness though to Conversation Australia, I have not personally seen them active in any fact checking of COVID-19 topics. 

2.      The third is Australian Associated Press (AAP) Network & they were adopted by New Zealand. Their exact ownership following the sale in June 2020 is unknown per Wikipedia. AAP though was given a very big incentive for Covid19 to be real. Media was getting a Covid19 licence rebate from ACMA who were trying to pull off a coup d’etat to seize more power.  APP restructured to run AAP Newswire as a not-for-profit tax dodge err “independent” fact check arm. Quoting Wikipedia as at 18/4/2025 “The AAP newswire was acquired by an independent, non-partisan Australian not-for-profit organisation in June 2020. As a not-for-profit organisation it does not have owners or shareholders. The exact ownership of the AAP since its 2020 sale and relaunch are unclear, as the terms of sale have not been released.”

As a 2x Robodebt victim I know all too well what APH is like. If our Aussie Uni-party (govt & opposition) are involved it won’t be constitutional or in the interest of Aussies or Kiwis.  The picture below relates to the 2021-22 budget & it is part of a media release dated 11 May 2021 financing a whole range of measures to trash the Aussies international human rights. Julia Inman Grant the foreign Democrat leaning former CIA operative controlling our E-Safety Commission. She publicly announced that Australians have no free speech – she is so wrong. Our 1901 Australian Constitution Act details the power it gives to parliament (& that includes the Governor General). Section 51v our communications section gives no power to APH to do anything to our online communications as private citizens.  There is a detailed list of what communications forms APH has control of & while it includes other like services, the internet is not like other services. That was clearly established by the issuance of patents in 1960’s. Further at the time our Constitution Act came into being, we were in an emergency the Boer War. Ergo no actions alleging an emergency need is validated to sideline the constitution. No Act can be created because there is already provision in the Constitution Act covering how citizens expect their communications to be dealt with. Grant & a lot of others have overstepped the bounds of their portfolio powers.

 

 

NZ now in possession of more information should be considering its own involvement with AAP Newswire factcheckers. (https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/news/budget-2021-22).

Of course, we can both give ourselves a warm & fuzzy feeling of protection by the fact all 3 of Aussies fact checkers are accredited by International Fact Checkers Network (IFCN). Until you look into IFCN that is. IFCN is a division of Poynter Institute which Wikipedia reports got a $1M donation from Poynter Foundation to help it along the way with Politifact. Poynter Foundation has Board Member Craig Alexander Newmark who is a big donor for Democrats & helped Obama in his election campaign. IFCN was only launched in 2015 & in its inaugural year received a $382,997 for grant topic “Global Health and Development Awareness and Analysis”.  This is a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation interest and as they were invested in Covid19 vaccines via CEPI, the entire IFCN was financially biased to promote the vaccines from the get go. Then there is the fact the fact checkers don’t want to tell you that there is no federal accreditation for factcheckers at all in USA. You can literally file IFCN in the bin as an independent accredited body. Put simply NZ parliament house is funding an unaccredited entity namely APP Newswire using citizens own public purse to attack them for at least one foreign country’s interest Australia & more than probably more.

Here is one of my censored posts on Meta. I received a nudge blackmark for circulating a free St John’s Ambulance chart & tip given me by an ambulance officer (I competed first aid courses to Advanced). St John’s Ambulance is endorsed by Anne Princess Royal & has been in existence helping Aussies for nearly 140 years  Factcheckers unwound years of community first aid as we are about to enter an aged population with baby boomers hitting 75. The impact of their actions will see thousands die from bystander apathy for years to come.

Fact checking was never about the safety of citizens. It was purposefully designed as part of Nudge to be the ultimate weapon using Misinformation to censor political dissidents. Mackay’s Versions show it was always a part of Nudge.  Here’s my post that saw my old account permantly deleted.  In order to delete the data that was 100% correct based on WHO & Our world data with appropriate links & a crystal clear calculation method Labor’s Chris Bowen MP alleged there was a brochure MAYBE distributed with similar contents in order for RMITABC to do a truly despicable days work & factcheck false all similar blogs warning of the lack of need for any vaccine.  RMIT’s $43M grant from Victorian Labor (human rights abusers State & Federal now) & ABC’s promise of more funding federally after election. There was no way my tweet was false Labor’s Chris Bowen MP had RMITABC do a false fact check. Bought & paid assassins & traitors doing it for foreign entities.

 

 

 

 

The Senate Covid19 inquiries in Australia were not about finding out about the truth they were to identify who knew the truth to make it easier to target them for Nudge. Have the people who had their jobs & careers stolen in Covid19 been returned to their former positions? No! The object of the mandates was to remove the people who would not comply to make it easier for them to  do worse next time.  The first thing any victim of Nudge learns is these monsters never stop & consider it is a victory for them if they end you. If you are not complying in health or any other matter you are the enemy.  When I beat govt in the Robodebt tribunal even with a solicitor the odds by the tribunals own annual reports were less than 2% success. I was still in hospital recovery self-defending & researching, because I was too sick to go to an underfunded community legal service.  I went public because I was helping people along the way with info about the computer faults. It made the news because publicly winning was so rare. Like many others that won waiver govt tried to set me up with a second Robodebt & I caught them in the act. Yesterday as I write this section on 1 April 2025, I had a tribunal hearing to recover money garnisheed off me by National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) for thousands of dollars worth of items they have admitted in a second tribunal they know I never received.  These lowlife Nudge scum do not care about laws because Nudge credo no. 1 that they use in their training sessions is “Doing good can free people to be bad.” Over 400,000 victims of Robodebt were used as Nudge cannon fodder most were unable to fight the proverbial city hall & didn’t bother trying. Some were driven to alleged suicide. Public servants ignored advices on illegality & an astounding 73 winning tribunal cases. I didn’t know about any winning cases because not one of them had been printed. I went public & even though I went public my case that showed the system was grossly flawed was never published. In inquiries public servants repeated phrases like “they were getting savings” (robbing people) & when asked about knowledge it was illegal after 73 losing tribunal cases, a settled Amato case & one of the largest administrative payouts in Australian government history in a Class Action they parroted “I didn’t turn my mind to it”.  In Covid19 the Nudgers have programmed people that they are vaccines & vaccines are good. Getting people vaccinated is doing good. “Doing good can free people to be bad”.  Their minds will never turn to the fact they have breached so many human rights they are in my opinion guilty of crimes against humanity. They are brainwashed & will be chanting “I didn’t turn my mind to it”.

 

 

 

Covid19 Innoculations were a Listed Poison not a Vaccine

 

By their nature the Covid19 inoculations were not vaccines. Just as humans have a normal effective temperature range of 36.1°C to 37.2°C with an average of 37°C, vaccines we have a normal effective storage temperature range of +2 to +8 deg with 4deg either side for temperature fluctuations in eg travel. shows the extreme temperatures required for storage of Covid vaccines minus 70-80 degrees.

 

 

 

 

Medical practitioners should have known that the Covid inoculations were not a vaccination by the storage temperatures. In fact, in Australia the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has been handing out listing exemptions for the Covid19 listed poisons enabling the inoculations to rebrand itself for higher uptake falsely as a vaccine https://www.tga.gov.au/news/notices/therapeutic-goods-poisons-standard-covid-19-vaccine-pfizer-raxtozina). Reminder this is a listed poison with:- 1. secret ingredients; 2. stored at temperatures conducive to gene therapy; 3. poor testing; 4. full indemnity to pharmaceutical companies; & 5.  a lot unethical coercion meran-labelling-exemption-2023 that included fear, threats & censorships. So much for the fully informed consent. That’s some dance steps by our medical fraternities. The stark difference in storage temperature was raised twice in my submission to Royal Commission Disability lodged Feb 2021 (before the Australian/NZ inoculation roll-out).

This link shows a picture of the Pfizer-Biotech vial https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/17/pfizer-vaccine-fda-says-extra-doses-in-vials-can-be-used-potentially-expanding-us-supply. Covid19 inoculations were a liquid inoculation distributed in multi-dose vials of up to 6 doses. In order to get them from the vial into a needle the vials would need to be defrosted slowly so they did not fracture compromising contents.  Shortly after I put this simple logic on to social media the message changed.  The inoculations could get warmer for a few hours. Those very expensive freezers though had been purchased using the public purse; NZ allegedly bought at least 9 ultra cold freezers December 2020.  https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300176687/covid19-ultracold-freezers-en-route-to-nz-ahead-of-pfizer-vaccine-rollout

 

 

When later I raised on social media that due to the size of Australia it would be impossible to keep the product a stable temperature in transit the message changed again that the Covid19 inoculations could be kept warmer for even longer. (I worked in chiller van cartage for a few years, where fruit & veg has to be regularly probed in transit). After many advices about the storage temperatures of the inoculations they can now be kept per CDC’s storage guide PDF “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Storage and Handling Summary” issued 05/02/2023 ref CS321570-I for up to 10 weeks at positive 2-8 degrees Celsius in an ordinary fridge. It takes 2 days by air to get from one side of the world to the next by plane & 6 weeks by boat. Australia & New Zealand did not buy those expensive freezers to store what was promoted to the public initially as a single then a double shot vaccine. If the freezers were actually bought, they were bought to store a listed poison experiment of a genetic nature or something else.

 

With a lot of foreign entities data mining DNA genome sequences that should get heavy consideration.  A lot of people that were ramping up Covid19 had insurance company links.  Jack Ma Ping Insurance donated $3M to Doherty Institute (to be discussed further) to increase vaccine uptake.  Dr Stephen Parnis the emergency room doctor an early Covid19 Australia media star & med school mate of Brett Sutton Melbourne’s Chief Health Officer, was not just a simple emergency room doctor. Parnis failed to disclose to his adoring Covid junkies, that he was on the Board of Miga Insurance. Then there are vaccine harms & deaths. A lot of people would be surprised there are things like Dead Peasant insurance policies where companies get to profit from deaths of employees. A quick death over total permanent disability payouts is cheaper for health insurers facing an aged population. The implications of knowing a family’s genetical medical history removes the guesswork out of insurance. Should people be unable to get insurance because of that, a greater burden would ultimately placed on public health as it would become unaffordable for many to afford private health cover.

 

Giving a very big benefit of doubt that the inoculations were not an unethical genome therapy given without fully informed & uncoerced consent, just consider for a moment the inoculation testing.  The Covid19 inoculation has gone from freezer storage at minus 70-80 to plus 2-8 degrees for 10 weeks able to be stored in the fridge. Also, I’m going to ignore the fact I would not want to drink even water that had been stored that long in the fridge. Whilst we do not know what the formulas & contents were, we do know that that had to have changed to allow for the dramatic storage temperature changes. Where are the trial results? Were they ever trialled before released on the public?

 

What exactly were they Testing for?

WHO’s quick switch from laboratory to clinical testing prevented establishing whether reinfection with the same original strain was occurring.  WHO knew it was impossible that reinfection with the same strain would occur, because of Covid19’s two main traits:- 1. mutates fast; &  2. almost always milder. Without going into origin theories at this point, If Covid19 was a natural mutation of coronavirus we had already had our cowpox to smallpox naturally acquired immunity shot. By December 2020 when the inoculations were rolled with an average of 2-3 colds per year almost everyone had experienced a coronavirus common cold in 12 months.  The common cold is a coronavirus only deadly to the highly vulnerable.

 

WHO quickly change from laboratory to clinical tests because if the same novel disease or a Variant of the disease registered within 6 months in a high number of people it would have shown Covid19 had fast recurrency or reinfection & there was no chance of immunity from any inoculation.  In order to establish if the alleged novel (or new) strain of Coronavirus was quickly recurrent or reinfectious ethical researchers would have needed to test reinfections to see if they were from the same strain. 

 

Coronavirus’ has millions of strains. It has two main traits - mutating fast & almost always milder. They didn’t retest because the alleged deadly Wuhan strain was nothing of the kind & a bait & switch had occurred on the tests. Ater searching myself & finding nothing I asked both Grok & Google AI for the data on the individual variant cases at any point in time. Neither could supply the individual data of Variants. So, for 4yrs of allegedly testing Variants of interest the data was so boring it was used for nothing but keeping the Covid19 fear going. At best the change from laboratory to clinical was because WHO knew the PCR tests were coming under fire, but considering those freezer temperatures I think it’s well past the time we should be getting straight answers on what the tests were really about.  

 

The change to clinical diagnosis kept the Covid19 cases rising, but they were not necessarily rising because they were really Covid19 cases. Most doctors were having no problems with giving a Covid19 clinical diagnosis. The doctors were getting nice big bonuses if they were doing a Covid19 consultation instead of one for a common cold or flu that ended in 2 minutes with a diagnosis its viral there’s nothing we can do.   And let’s not forget extra consultations later with the inoculations. The symptoms were exactly the same & there is no way a doctor could distinguish between influenza or a common cold.

 

 

This link has a Freedom of Information (FOI) response held on the Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) webpage (https://t.co/K4Ikt9CYm2).  Across page 42 & 43  they are explaining who was excluded from trials of the “Safe & Effective” Covid19 inoculations. On that list as you can see from the bottom arrow in the picture exempted was anyone with a body mass index (BMI) of greater than 40. Almost 147,000 NZ adults have a BMI of greater than 40kg. The inoculation was never tested safe for them. When you go through the list of the other trial exempted eg pregnant women etc you very quickly realise that the inoculations were never even trialled to be “Safe” for most of our normal populations. Politicians & health depts either closed their eyes crossed their fingers & hoped for the best or were totally evil & corrupt to roll out the inoculations with this trial data. Excuses will be made for cutting corners like moving “at the speed of science”, but this was data they had in their hot little hands from 9 Nov 2020 well before the inoculation roll-outs. Nothing excuses the speed of negligence & by that time everyone should have known that Covid19 was not a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) as determined by UK 13 March 2020, China’s data, NZ data & Australia’s data.  At that time both our countries had the quantitative aka historical data of Covid19 deaths from our own countries showing there was no threat at that time.  NZ started its vaccinations 20 February 2021 more than 3 months later. 

 

As part of my Australian Royal Commission (RC) Disability update original lodged Feb 2021 & update lodged Feb 2022 I included statistics from a Pfizer link inside our old health dept’s website on adverse events. It was showing that 45% of people had side-effects & of them 1% had serious side-effects. NZ govt & health depts knew the inoculation had not been properly tested, knew it was off the usual charts harmful, but continued to roll-out inoculations & boosters.  Below is a screen capture indicating the NZ govt & health dept was using undue menace to get people to use what they had to know by quantitative statistics at the time of the article was a harmful inoculation. Worse than knowing the inoculation was harmful I will proceed to show that they all knew from as early as 12 Jan 2020 that Covid19 was no threat at all. I will show that the reason that Pfizer never tested for transmission was because it knew from the data that Covid19 was more than likely bacterial or possibly aspiration pneumonia & that it did not transmit at all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Modelling Covid19

I knew Covid19 was overblown & the only way I could prove it was to pro rata China’s risk factor to Australia’s. I wanted to do a quantitative model which uses historic data to predict outcomes. Initially I thought I would assign each symptom a risk rating based on the level of treatment needed for the symptom & then find a comparable perhaps combination of diseases upon which to use as a benchmark for the resources needed. I used news reports for my source for symptoms. In the end though when I looked at the symptoms, they were an exact match for influenza and pneumonia with the addition of post-traumatic stress disorder. I used WHO’s Situation Reports for ground zero numbers. Then I did a simple pro rata based on population sizes. The newspaper reports gave me the details of the incubation & surface life times.  Once that was release early February 2020 I backtracked from the first cluster to allow for the incubation time to give me a start of approximately 15 Dec 2020. 

 

I had an exact match for symptoms & ergo was able to create a far simpler model of a pro rata to China’s population & using reports of numbers that rated the severity of past Australian flu seasons as a benchmark of the future risk so a fair perspective could be seen. I had to initially guess the incubation/surface life periods. There was no information on human coronavirus but there was information on animal coronavirus that put it at about 14days. I decided that as the first cluster was 31 December 2020, I would assume a Covid19 start of 15 December 2020 & run a model for 90 days. This period was chosen because it is a normal cold & flu season. At the end of the 90 day period mid-March 2020 just when WHO was calling a pandemic my worst case scenario death total was 55 for Australia. There was absolutely no basis on the numbers coming out of Wuhan to call a pandemic.

 

My model was not used with any fancy program not even excel just a calculator & paint & I tweaked the data daily with the new numbers coming out of WHO. It was loaded up to Twitter daily. I submitted it to Senate 27 May 2020. When the real number came out from Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) of deaths up to 31 August 2020 they included pneumonia & comorbidities the first year. Once they were removed the total was 43. I was only 12 deaths out. The second year after 2 cold & flue seasons at 31^st July 2020 ABS released a Covid19 report with deaths with only Covid19 on death certificates for the accumulative two years. The total was 103 (2 x 55=110 – 103= 7 only deaths out).

 

At first I tried to correct the incorrect information that was being put out. Then I realised the key rampers were purposefully pulling the hoax & ramping it up for politics. There were coordinated teams of troll/BOTs targeting people questioning Covid19 & directing them to 2x doctors Dr Eric Feigl Ding & Dr Dena Grayson.  It is my opinion from what I saw that both of these doctors were working together.  Feigl-Ding was linked to both WEF & WHO https://aajastudio.org/experts/dr-eric-feigl-ding/. The troll nudgers had given you a choice of two:- 1.  Ding who was a nutritionist & epidemiologist & had no qualifications in virology was predicting Armageddon. His data was so poor it did not factor in a correct start date allowing for an incubation period; & Grayson who was more reserved & offering a lot of don’t knows. She had to know that coronavirus was a large disease family that included the common cold, mutated fast & almost always milder. Somehow those small crucial details that would have dispelled panic weren’t as good as the clickbait of doctors that can’t treat a bad cold. These doctors were putting out trash so I decided to look into the trolls that were pushing them.

Note my data source here at the bottom for numbers. It is not WHO but a news channel. That is because WHO had not published the days situation report for 25 January 2020.  In fact, WHO filled in the blanks after it had played a lot of naughty games.

 e One of these was @Shelhol who started the toiletpapergate as shown above that countries were hit by. Others in this bunches collective preplanned things like elbow handshakes & those lockdowns also above. Others include an alleged former NSA operative John Shindler who met with Grayson on 13 January2020 a week before Covid19 hit the WHO fan with it starting the collection of data for its WHO Situation Reports.  The 13 January 2020 date was one day after WHO’s 12 January 2020 report that showed that Covid19 was no threat. In 7 days, we went from nothing to see here on the novel (or new) coronavirus strain, to the start of the alleged pandemic & the timing of this meeting considering I noted them very early as ramping up the hoax is an extraordinary coincidence.

 

 

 

 

 

@shelhol has unsurprisingly now made its Twitter account that showed he was in regular communique with Grayson & @thespybrief protected & deleted a lot of its earlier posts connecting him.  The spy brief is ex National Security Agency. In the tweets below (screen captured 15 May 2024) you’ll note Grayson uses the term “hanging” & “strangulation” I lost my first Twitter account still permanently suspended, for quoting the Clint Eastwood movie “Hang ‘Em High”. It must be different rules on Twitter if you’re a US Democrat with former NSA mates (are they ever “former”?).

 

 

Senate Covid had the information on Ding & Grayson in my submission lodged to them 27 May 2020. It also had screen captures of the trolls like @Shelhol that were directing the Covid curious to Ding & Grayson. @Shelhol & friends started toiletpapergate that caused the panic in our grocery stores. Their tweets between themselves showed they were behind planning some of the bizarre measures like the elbow handshakes.  They were so cocky patting themselves on their backs that almost all the world was in a state of shock & brainwash they were boasting & planning all the measures in open Twitter. I was wide awake.  As other Qld non-essentials were being encouraged to spring clean their homes, do home reno’s & dig a veg patch (probably for Schwab WEF’s new owners because they told us we will own nothing, eat bugs & be happy about it) between modelling & researching for my entertainment I tracked the bast*rds.

 

Here is the WHO modelled dashboard for Australia 13 deaths stands out, but it doesn’t tell you that the 13 died in over 14 weeks of coronavirus. It doesn’t tell you that those people probably had pneumonia + other comorbidities or that they were in the normal expected range for deaths. The graph predicts a continual climb up of deaths, but it does not tell you that people were recovering from Covid19. Coronavirus has two traits it mutates fast & almost always milder. The particular strain we were all told to focus on was the Wuhan allegedly novel (or new) coronavirus whose patients first started presenting as I will show at Wuhan hospital on the 27 December 2019 (4 days before the report was made as a matter of course to WHO China country office on).  Any colour could have been used but they chose red blood clot balloons. Australia had one balloon sat in the middle of the desert. The balloons were not even to show you strategic risk points which as an island would be ports. This dashboard does not even update in real time.  In the middle of an alleged global emergency where our hospitals were supposedly being overwhelmed enough to put elective surgery & cancer tests on hold, they weren’t just practicing dance steps, but were trialling new computer games , they weren’t just practicing their dance steps but were playing computer games.

 

 

Politicians across the globe fronted the media using modelling saying Covid19 was worse than the flu which the general English-speaking populace has historically related by habit as a short form for both cold (Coronavirus) & flu (Orthomyxoviridae) season. It was an unfair comparison. WHO had been rebranding morbidity categories under ICD-10. ICD-10 saw classification updates from WHO & some of the reports I looked at early referred to a change splitting influenza from pneumonia in 2018 on Australian health records. Covid19 data coming out of WHO included pneumonia in with its alleged Covid19 numbers initially & that is evidenced by Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) morbidity statistics released 28 Oct 2020 for data as at 31^st Aug 2020.  Therein you are given the Covid19 death statistics, but also advised it included 54% had pneumonia. When comparisons were done Covid19 (inclusive of pneumonia cases) to influenza (exclusive of pneumonia cases), by politicians that kept telling you Covid19 was more deadly than the flu, it was a deceitful comparison. That is before we consider that ages & comorbidities of the alleged Covid19 also purposefully avoided by politicians lock step globally.

 

 

Note the comment in my 31 Jan 2020 tweet below “Would be great if they summarised recovered no.’s too.”  It was a very long time before WHO admitted to recoveries were happening. They only focused on cases & though those cases had recovered & were no longer current cases. People had recovered already before WHO published its first WHO Situation Report. We know that because the China Investigative team report I will be discussing further shows that of the first 3 patients who presented at hospital on 27 December 2019 excepting for the one that died who had cancer & liver disease the other two were released 16 Jan 2020. WHO purposefully downplayed that people were recovering. They intentionally withheld that there was natural immunity & in fact removed the old definition from their website. At a later time, WHO tried to hide a 10 May 2021 WHO report on the statistics of Natural Immunity to Covid19. WHO was unfathomably purposefully ramping up the panic of Covid19. That is the very last thing that you do in an emergency. (That is a qualified statement as someone that did the Qld Logan State Emergency Welfare Course a module of which was identifying psychological harm in an any emergency).  The unethical psychologists that were working Covid19 were too busy ramping up the panic instead of looking at the effects it was having. 

 

This was my early model & I ran it for 90 days from an estimated start date of Patient Zero of 15 Dec 2019. 90 days was chosen as it is the period of a flu season. The model was an experiment using no flashy programs not even excel & was just to keep my modelling skills up to par.  I used a calculator & paint (I was also practicing graphics) for better presentation & ease of update. It could have been presented with any word-based program for the internet circulation. The entire thing could have been achieved by paper pen & simple math. I ran an experiment of what could be achieved with limited resources in a real heath emergency.  It is blurry, because once the initial model design was decided on, I just updated the data daily using WHO’s Situation Reports. Isolated communities of course would have closer access to local deceased. When I released the first draft people understood the simple format & were responding immediately & were following along daily.  The last thing you do if something is working is change methods in a real emergency because you do not have valuable time to retrain. So, I stuck with the format to see out the flu season. The notes in orange were entered later, but Senate Covid19 acknowledged receipt of this model 27 May 2020 when it accepted my Senate submission as “correspondence”. This was an accurate quantitative model, because I had taken the time to learn about Hubei and coronavirus & established a disease benchmark. I was one person locked up in my home with no access to libraries limited access to health dept data & put this simple calculation out every single day on Twitter with the links to the WHO report the data came from.  My estimate of 55 deceased for Australia per cold & flu season was a worst case scenario figure & was only 12 out the first year to 31 Aust 2020 & 7 out after 2 years (55 per season x 2) accumulative 103.  With all the resources APH had at their disposal they supposedly arrived at the conclusion Covid19 was a real health threat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note in the bottom box of my rough model above that WHO’s China data is a combination of “confirmed & clinical diagnosed cases”. Confirmed cases were laboratory confirmed cases, but WHO had changed very quickly before even a full flu season had expired to a clinical diagnosis. My above 90-day model ended 16 March 2020, but was conclusive that even though cases were not all lab confirmed & were falsely inflated with clinical diagnosis cases, the alleged Covid19 disease was not the threat it was being made out to be.  By 13 March 2020 WHO would have had enough of an indication that 3 more days was going to make very little difference. WHO called the pandemic knowing Covid19 was no threat.

 

I designed my model myself because of the lack of rational death data. In my opinion an absurd methodology for a novel (or new) disease is being taught in universities. The death rate reflects the percentage of death to cases presenting for treatment at medical institutes. This was why we had so much focus on cases cases cases. This may be of use to the separate medical establishments themselves, for estimating resources to current patients, but as someone that holds a Diploma of Accounting the reasoning for this methodology is just bizarre for modelling a country & in fact global novel (or new) disease. Eg if 1x pneumonia case presents in a season at a hospital & dies on this logic of recording cases to deaths that equates to a 100% death rate. We know though quantitatively that pneumonia does not have a 100% death rate in the wider community. We know that in many other seasons, many patients have survived from pneumonia. We know that in other cold & flu seasons pneumonia presents itself in waves with the most vulnerable presenting quickly & early. If you are trying to gauge the percentage of worst-case scenario risk to the whole of the country the first few days of data gives you that by comparing deaths to population.  Almost everything I looked at in Covid19 was unethically intent on heightening fear.

 

Had health depts done any checking at all, they would have realised it was impossible to exponentially model Covid19 on WHO’s data for many reasons but mostly:- 1. the data was not coming out with a regularity that enabled the rate of exponential estimated spread to be quantitatively confirmed with actual accurate & reliable data; 2. They did not have a patient 0 origin & initially had no incubation time guide; 3. Only 10% of the world’s population is in the Southern Hemisphere so an equal rate of spread was always impossible.  It is my considered opinion that health depts were not checking the data, because they knew it was not a real health emergency event. 

 

Unbeknownst to me at the same time as I was calling out this outrageous overblown hoax & misappropriation of govt resources 29 February 2020 Sanjeev Sabhlok who was still working for the Dan Andrews Labor Victorian govt at that time was also calling it a bust. Simultaneously & independent of me Sanjeev Sabhlok in another State Victoria, using his own calculation methods arrived at the same conclusion that the response was grossly disproportionate to the threat. 31 July, 2021, Sabhlok released his emailed internal memo to the Victorian Govt dated 28 February, 2020.  Accounting & maths are precise sciences.  With resources available to other Govts health depts across the globe if WHO was not a biased self-interest entity WHO an organisation should have in unison come to the same conclusion as me & Sabhlok. Despite the data WHO continued with the fraud & just ramped up the censorships of those of us speaking out. In light of the public manner Sabhlok left in September 2020, I just find it unbelievable incompetence at best & criminal negligence at worst that his data & reason was not discussed at Australia’s National Cabinet that has been found acting unlawfully.

 

A lot of govt data is in monthly reports. Ergo with data that of course ends at months end & balances are carried forward. Australia & NZ had nice big lockstep attention grabbing distractions ready to go. 28 February 2020 NZ had its first Covid19 case. 1 March 2020 Australia got its first Covid19 death. Just a day apart on a pre-planned calendar if you were from Ethiopia like Tedros or following the UN New Era 13-month calendar. The differing months making it less obvious of a uni-country preplanned ramp up.

 

My submission was accepted as correspondence, which means effectively declined from being published Nov 2020 after all my med calls submitted in May 2020 were proved correct. I provided an accurately modelled Covid19 & I used WHO’s data. My modelling showed only 55 deaths worst case scenario for Australia. My estimate of Covid19 deaths was only 12 out. The correct number was 43 as confirmed by Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in its release of 31 August 2020 data in October 2020. I showed that the disease was recurrent aka reinfectious. Ergo no vaccine would ever work. Within the submission I provided links to perpetrators that ramped up the hoax. I provided proof the data they were getting from Doherty’s Institute was just utter trash. I provided likely options of motive for the hoax. My submission was denied publish, after every single one of my medical calls had been proved correct & questions were being asked about the origins of Covid19. If your Senate submissions are published in Australia, you are afforded protections under the law. APH was rejecting the correct information & it continued to do that in our Senate Excess Mortality inquiry. Within the submission I proved the initial Australian modelling being done by Doherty’s was terrible. The data was unreadable, inaccurate & totally worthless. Here are samples  

 

 

As shown above I was circulating on social media an accurate forecast model within 12 deaths from scratch completed 16 March 2020 with virtually no resources. Doherty’s had access to actual data after the fact & only had to report on past events. We got our modelled data 7 April 2020 after reporters were chasing govt for it & when people were wising up to UK’s Imperial College data being rubbish. My data wasn’t pretty to look at but it was accurate & timely. Doherty’s looked pretty, but was atrocious & grossly corrupted by self-interest donors.  Doherty’s had received a $3.2M grant from Jack Ma of Ping Insurance Company to ramp up inoculation uptake.  May 2023 Doherty’s finally embraced China’s medical advices it had been circulating since March 2020 that they were curing Covid19 just with their traditional cures (our equivalent is good ole vegie/chicken soup). This was after Doherty’s had received a donation from a garlic farm. 

 

All the models were just theatre. Part of the show. A lot of countries were acting lockstep with each other & doing somersaults with media so you did not realise it. New Zealand locked down 19 March from 11.59pm & Australia locked down 20 March 2020. Effectively the same date but records for history searches show NZ 19 March & Australia 20 March 2020.  That kind of synchronicity was no mistake and the effort to disguise it tells you there’s a bigger story to be told. In UK’s Coronavirus Lessons Learned questioning of Matt Hancock he refers to the Red Green & Amber lists & directing countries. A lot of countries have adopted Traffic Nudge. NZ & Australian govts both harmfully interfered with the travel free move rights of their citizens. Who was our traffic controller???

 

 

 

 

 

 

Australia’s Senate Covid was utterly corrupted with the only independent Senator thereon a member now of the Jacqui Lambie Party a Tasmanian Australian based party that has been slamming the people who chose not to get the inoculation. https://www.tiktok.com/@10newsfirst/video/7033243080727760130.  When I lodged to Royal Commission in Feb 2021 I sent that appalling Committee my update. I watched the public Senate hearings. They chose as witnesses “expert” submissions only from people that were predicting Armageddon numbers. It was a gross misuse of public funds for a big pharma advertisement. Let me be crystal clear anyone says that they made a mistake & with hindsight blah blah is lying. APH was given the correct information rebutting the obvious trash being floated at every critical stage that harm could have been prevented to both our countries people. They just did not give a damn.

.

 

 

 

 

Australian Universities Bought for Foreign & Political Interests

2025 Trump’s stopped USAID funding from 6 Australian Universities resulted in an appeal to the current Australian Labor Party (ALP) Prime Minister Albanese. This is one the news reports & I note it inaccurately states 7 universities. University of NSW & UNSW are the same place.  UNSW should stand out to every Australian, because it was from where Mary Louise McLaws aka the Covid19 Voice of Reason & the on call Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) Covid19 “expert” stemmed from (& I mean that in more ways than one).

 

 

By the end of Covid19 I had identified a network of universities harmfully ramping up Covid19 that I could see was a hoax.  One of the key figures for ramping up Covid19 in Australia was Mary-Louise McLaws. ABC had introduced Ms Laws to the Australian public as a WHO Covid19 expert.  WHO had a committee structure in place for Covid19 & there was an expert committee.  McLaws was not on it. As of 3^rd April 2025 when I checked McLaws is on a 36-member WHO committee called COVID-19 Infection Prevention and Control Guidance Development Group (https://www.who.int/groups/covid-19-infection-prevention-and-control-guidance-development-group). This in itself is an astounding achievement in its own right, because Australia’s go to Covid19 emergency “expert” McLaws supposedly died of brain cancer in August 2023. No-one on that WHO committee missed that our “expert” has been absent in a year & a half. 

 

I was calling out an affiliation between McLaws, Raina McIntyre of UNSW Kirby Inst. & Prof McCaffery from Uni of Syd in 2020 & early 2021. The three were clearly working together to unethically ramp up a fraud that Covid19 was a real threat. The three of them were deceiving the public, pretending non-affiliation with each other so they appeared to be giving separate views on Covid19 & punitive measures. These measures of course supported each other’s prior research. I tried to warn the UNSW that a hoax was unethically being pulled by the 3 profiles. UNSW lied about their association with Uni of Sydney. At that time both universities were working in a partnership getting NSW govt grants for development of an mRNA Ctr. McLaws was no expert, but she was the number 1 signatory on a letter from Pathology Technology Australia Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs). RATs:- do not work; are only an indicative test; & a Covid19 positive read has to be confirmed by a PCR test that has been proven not to work also in 2x Courts now (to be discussed further). Who was selling RATs in Australia? Former Deputy Liberal Party member Julie Bishop’s boyfriend at the time David Panton’s family.

 

McLaws also was ramping up the need for Covid19 inoculations for teens & toddlers. When serious questions started arising about the safety of the inoculations McLaws is alleged to have died of cancer. Below are some of the responses to a screen shot of ABC’s Q & A’s live audience show Twitter tweet. The tweet was promoting an upcoming program with McLaws who appeared as usual by video wearing black (easier for AI graphics because you can’t see shadow creases on clothes). Some of McLaws’ fans tweeted support of her upcoming appearance using the phrase & I scanned them to see if any had details that gave proof of life. I didn’t get very far before I noticed an absurd phrase  “Voice of Reason” being used by multiple twitter profiles.  The odds of that happening is incredibly small.  I can only find one alleged live appearance of McLaws & a still shot that was in a newspaper of a live appearance allegedly at Australia’s press club. The still shot shows a lot of graphic editing was done.  In case I missed something I asked Grok AI if it could find a live appearance. It came up with the press club meet that I cannot confirm because the other two identities that appeared have definite Covid19 conflicts, the still shot raises huge questions & newspapers were getting huge amounts of big pharma money for advertising to promote Covid19. The only other show Grok found was from a Q & A broadcasting schedule. Trouble is Q & A had changed & the day it was broadcasting its shows.  The date Grok found for an alleged episode there was no Q & A show broadcasted. I checked either side of that date in case it had been an incorrect date. A lot of pre-planning has gone into McLaw’s appearance in the media I think.

 

 

 

 I used Grok as my sounding block & it helps me clarify my mind & determine if directions I’m heading in are bizarre, biased or those of a plausibly reasonable thinking person.    For this test above of my research, it was the perfect impartial factchecker, because Grok has links to govt & in fact BETA & McLaws was a behavioural nudger. Despite ABC & BETA being both public access govt websites & ergo govt authoritative figures the limitations of Grok’s programming did not let it get access to BETA. Grok did not even know about its own history at BETA. I asked it. Do I think AI will have a place in medicine absolutely, but limited. Renewal of simple scripts, meet greet at receptions. If we can not trust AI though to deal with even its own history with memory banks wiped, how will it identify family histories of genetically acquired conditions.

 

 

 

 

History of Covid19 – the Untold by Media Story

The first World Health Organisation (WHO) press release on Covid19 was 5 Jan 2020. At that time it had not been identified as a coronavirus, but as 44 patients detected in Wuhan City, Hubei reported to WHO China Country Ofice with “Pneumonia of unknown cause – China”.  Pneumonia is a medical complication not a disease in itself. It can be caused by a variety of things eg. Bacteria, viruses & fungi.  It is a common complication of influenza & Covid19 shared the same symptoms as influenza.  Prior to 2018 in Australia, minor flu like infections & pneumonia were all grouped together. Australia. Quote: “ABS ranks leading causes of death in this publication based on research presented by the World Health Organization (WHO) in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, Volume 84, Number 4, April 2006, 297-304.” This can be verified by checking the 2017 morbidity statistics of Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) mortality statistics (https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/3303.0~2017~Main%20Features~Australia's%20leading%20causes%20of%20death,%202017~2).  I remember seeing but cannot now find a document that noted a change splitting influenza from pneumonia as being from WHO on the old Australian health website as an explainer for a graph statistic. When seeking out influenza mortality data for 2018. I went looking for why that occurred (because pneumonia is a common complication with influenza) on WHO’s website. The only details I could find on pneumonia were WHO was allegedly looking into childhood pneumonia. 2017 was noted as a bad influenza year. I was in hospital post leg amputation for the whole 2017 cold & flu season & caught just flu myself nearly dying.  The timing of the change related to the splitting of pneumonia/influenza in records for the 2018 year didn’t strike me as suspicious until Covid19. What struck me as unusual about 2018 was over the counter medications for cold &  flu containing codeine ceased. For years busy working people with no time to go to doctors & people unable to afford doctors in western countries had their ability to self-medicate at their own expense.  Why when it was obvious we were entering the passing over period of the baby boomers would you discourage people self-medicating & doing an early intervention at their expense instead of the public purse.  People that have had to buy the meds themselves for colds & flu that occur 2-3 times a year are more likely to be more careful & under use to save the rest of the packet for other onsets.

The earliest reference of Covid19 being identified as a coronavirus was a WHO report 9 Jan 2020 (https://www.who.int/hongkongchina/news/detail/09-01-2020-who-statement-regarding-cluster-of-pneumonia-cases-in-wuhan-china).

 

Pic6

 

Key information from the 9 January 2020 report is as follows:-

1.       A preliminary definition of a “novel(or new)” coronavirus was identified.  The coronavirus family has two main traits:- 1. Coronavirus mutates fast; & 2. Coronavirus almost always mutates milder eg common cold. There are thousands of new Coronavirus mutations every year & a “novel(or new)” one is not unusual. By 30 June, 2020, estimates are that there had already been 353,341 mutation events of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In paragraph 4 the reader is clearly advised that “novel coronaviruses emerge periodically in different areas”. A “novel (or new)” coronavirus strain appearing is a normal medical occurrence & repeating is not unusual. To quote again the 5^th Jan 2020 report “novel coronaviruses emerge periodically in different areas”.;

 

2.       There is no visible evidence in this report that it was “deadly” or a super spreader. The reader is told that the disease “can cause severe illness in some patients” as underlined in para3 in Pic 6. When reading the full paragraph though, you realise the author is using the term as part of a sliding scale with “less-severe disease such as a common cold” at one polar end & a “severe disease such as SARS or MERS” at the other polar end”.  Even a common cold can be a severe in some vulnerable people, but we do not shut our societies down for a common cold that some people may be affected by. 

 

3.      Gene sequencing was based on an isolate of only one positive patient sample. This one positive patient isolate was used to determine the benchmark sequence to match others to distinguish there was a cluster of the same genetic sequence.

4.      By 9^th Jan 2020 Chinese authorities with an actual patient sample before them had tested for & ruled out SARS that had been the first pandemic of the 21^st Century MERS. Per Wikipedia scientists working at the Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre in Vancouver finished mapping the genetic sequence of SARS-Cov-1 in 2003.  This was over 16 years before Covid19 & plenty of time to get the SARS code right. A full genetic code from blood takes an advertised to the public time of 2-6 weeks. This was a possible global emergency situation with lab staff working at the speed of science & by only removing the factor of weekends we have 10 days. Both PCR tests if in use & blood tests achievable with the 31 Dec 2019 date reported at this time.  SARS was ruled out but suspiciously Covid19 ended up rebranded as SARS-Cov-2.

5.     

 

On 9 Jan 2020 the first Covid19 death is alleged to have occurred in a 61-year-old identified as Patient 2 of a cluster of 3 people at Wuhan hospital on 27^th December 2019. There is no mention of underlying medical conditions in this report from the “China Novel Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team” submitted to NIH 20 Feb 2020 (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7092803/). 

I am not a biologist to consider or comment on the rest of the report, but key information jumps out at me from the details of the patients: -

1.      3x adult patients were admitted 27 Dec 2019.  Patient 3 who was a 32yo male & this was young to be severely affected by Covid19 considering the usual demographics of the disease I considered at a later time.  Patient 3 was admitted on 27 December & discharged 16 Jan 2020 which is a period of 20 days or nearly 3 weeks. He was fit enough after Covid19 he recovered & was discharged on 16^th January 2020, but did not have a “Clinical profile”.  Also, unlike Patients 1 & 2, we have no start date for the onset of his symptoms. This seems an abnormally long time for a patient to be in hospital with no medical profile & clearly no visible additional comorbidities that made it to his treatment charts. Patient 3 clearly recovered to a physical state that he was discharged on the same day as the older female Patient 1. Why after recovery & still in hospital was he incapable of giving a medical history? A language barrier, no abnormal risk from Covid19 & ergo no need to dig further on one of the first three presenting cases;

 

2.      We don’t know about Patient 3, but Patient 2 had reported symptoms as early as 20 December 2019 & Patient 1 on 23 December 2019. That is 2x people with the alleged “novel (new)” Covid19 symptoms allegedly super spreading with surface life up to a week around the market before they presented at Wuhan hospital;

 

3.       “Patient 2 in his 60’s died on January 9, 2020. No biopsy specimens were obtained”.  If this was the threat it has been made out to be it seems utterly bizarre to me that you would not do a full forensic autopsy of the first death. This death was 4 days after WHO’s 5 January 2020, Press Release with a pneumonia cluster of 44 identified & this was the first death.  Despite having a “clinical profile” on Patient 2, there was no information on comorbidities in the report. After more research I found the patient suffered severe underlying medical conditions of cancer & liver disease.  An autopsy was not performed probably because from his “clinical profile” there was no need to ascertain his cause of death was natural.  It doesn’t explain though, why this “novel (new)” coronavirus that was being focussed on as being a possible future threat did not get a very detail autopsy.  This was 14 days or 2 weeks since the 27^th December 2019 hospital presents. I have considered Chinese religions & dismissed them as none of the main religions doctrines inherently prohibit autopsies. It is my opinion that an autopsy was not performed because there had been no further cases since 2 January 2020 & with more knowledge about the incubation period, after 14 days they knew the outbreak from whatever source of the Wuhan original novel (or new) coronavirus was contained.   https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Risk%20assessment%20-%20pneumonia%20Wuhan%20China%2017%20Jan%202020.pdf

 

 

 

10^th Jan 2020 (12 days after the 31^st December 2019 WHO cluster report).  WHO issues an update putting air travel on alert. (https://www.who.int/news-room/articles-detail/who-advice-for-international-travel-and-trade-in-relation-to-the-outbreak-of-pneumonia-caused-by-a-new-coronavirus-in-china/.

Key information from this report:-

1.       Despite giving readers the spectrum, of what the “novel (new)” coronavirus may be, a cold to SARS/MERS, the report doesn’t advise that only the day before the worst case scenario pole of SARS & MERS had been tested for & ruled out as was mentioned in the WHO report dated 9^th Jan 2020. To quote again the 5^th Jan 2020 report “novel coronaviruses emerge periodically in different areas”. The senior people at WHO were tunnel visioned in dealing with the emergency as presented initially & were poorly considering emergencies evolve.

 

2.       At para2 the report gives the symptoms of the alleged “novel (new)” cluster all of which are a match for pneumonia per the American Lung Association. The report title including the words “pneumonia caused by a new coronavirus” focuses on pneumonia, because whoever wrote the report was concentrating on pneumonia & not a “new” or “novel (new)” coronavirus because a “novel (new)” coronavirus was not unusual;  

;

3.       Para2 line4 quote, “preliminary investigation suggests that there is no significant human-to-human transmission, and no infections among health care workers have occurred”. This is now 12 days after the 31^st December 2019 & this report is telling readers that close contacts eg health workers were not being infected by what was promoted to the public as a super spreader virus;

 

10^th January, 2020 on the same day as the WHO report on “pneumonia caused by a new coronavirus” WHO issued its PDF guidance on how to treat nCov aka coronavirus which has a huge subset that includes the common cold. (https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/332447/WHO-2019-nCoV-IPC-2020.1-eng.pdf). Quote, “This is the first edition of infection prevention and control (IPC) guidance when a novel coronavirus (nCoV) is suspected.” We have had colds & “novel (new)” coronavirus for Millenniums, but WHO even with the knowledge that Covid19 was not related to SARS or MERS & did not transmit to close contacts issued a PDF to accompany its travel warning. I put it to this commission the intent was to suggest fear where there should have been none. Repeat “This is the first edition”. Millenniums of cold mutations aka novel coronavirus nCoV & yet since decades of payments to WHO & this is the first edition. One of the things that struck me was how little information on basic health was actually on the WHO website. There was not even basic first aid things like a resuscitation chart. In a real medical viral emergency, the people most likely to be affected first are most likely first responders, because hospitals & doctors will be where the sick will congregate. That leaves others less skilled trying to fill their gaps.  The WHO website was not fit for emergency use.

 

 

11 Jan 2020 A report on this date exists we know that because WHO tells us in Situation Report No 1 that it received detailed information at dot point two. I was unable to locate a copy of that report with searches today (21 March 2025) under pneumonia, coronavirus, nCov. This is a report on the NIH website. It is authored by 7 people & yet when they researched Covid19  WHO reports on 9, 10 that I featured herein don’t get a mention.  This is possibly because in their timeline of key events at the time they were researching the information was probably not visible to them. This has been used nefariously to discredit & censor reports on social media as I will show further in this submission.  https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7079563/.  Alpha numeric cataloguing of key reports is not new (or novel). Had there been a sequential database we all would realise reports were missing.

 

 

 

12 Jan 2020 WHO issued an updated “Description of the Situation”.  This report was 13 days after the WHO China Country office was informed on 31 Dec 2019 of cases of the first cluster of 44. This report is 16 days after the cluster had started to appear at hospitals after the 27 December 2020 start with patients 1,2 & 3.  (https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2020-DON233). 

Pic6

Pic7

 

Following are key details related to the 12 Jan 2020 report:-

1.      The report advises in more than one place there were only 41 confirmed cases of the original cluster not the 44 first reported in the 5^th Jan 2020 Press Release. The 9^th January 2020 Report does not refer at all to case numbers, because in my opinion it had dismissed Covid19 as an abnormal threat.  Quoting the 5^th Jan 2020 report again “novel coronaviruses emerge periodically in different areas”. Chinese New Year celebrations was from Sat 25 Jan-Sat 8 Feb 2020. It is not hard to imagine less experienced medical staff would have been handling shifts over the irrelevant western New Year in China. This would ensure more experienced staff had a break before their peak period of dealing with inebriated revellers injuries. The first report I heard about as to how the media supposedly heard about Covid19 was from BBC Outside Source Ros Atkins advising medical students had been overheard talking about a new flu. Students make mistakes;

 

 

2.      44 pneumonia cases where initially reported. Pneumonia is detectable by chest x-rays. It is a little hard to hide pneumonia in lungs in an x-ray. Either an error in testing was made initially or there were potentially 3 other pneumonia patients who also had novel (new) genetic sequences, that did not match the run of the mill expected coronavirus strain. We must assume the reduction in cluster numbers came after more testing, but on 12 January only 3 days since the 9^th January 2020 report what further testing  testing to isolate of only one positive patient sample linked to the particular strain we know of as Covid19;

 

3.      We know by the dates from the China Research Team (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017) that the first Wuhan hospital presents were 3 patients on 27 December 2019. Patient 2’s symptoms appeared first on 20 December 2019. Patient 2 had severe comorbidities cancer & liver disease it is a reasonable conclusion his immunity to diseases was poor & would have succumbed fast to a virus.  Patient 1 was a healthy woman in her 40’s she developed symptoms 23 December 2019.  From this report we are told the 41 cases of the alleged “novel (or new) Covid19 had started 8 Dec 2019 to 2^nd Jan 2020. Patient 1 and 2 were clearly not Patients 1 and 2 as there had to have been earlier cases.

 

4.a. All along people have been pushed & pulled to two camps of thought the natural evolution of the virus & the start at the market or the lab leak theory with a genetically engineered virus escaping. All along I have been opposed to the pangolin & bat theory because to be blunt it is just ridiculous. A rare bat to the region infects an endangered species pangolin that wandered into a bat cave, Pangolin are nocturnal ant eater like creatures with huge noses. Bats colonies stink a pangolin with a good sense of smell would not have been going anywhere near the bat cave. This information was supplied to Australia’s Royal Commissions Aged/Disability  Feb 2021 with a strong hint they should be looking at the lab leak theory.

 

4.b. If you dismiss one theory from your reasoning or through pressure the only one left must be the correct answer - right? WRONG!  The stories were both credible because elements of truths were included that supported both & that means the truth possibly was somewhere in between.  We cannot dismiss that as part of the information we have been given the main cluster arose in the Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market. In stating this I note I have considered the information given in the US “Origins of Covid Report” (https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ORIGINS-OF-COVID-19-REPORT.pdf).  I note that WHO’s 44 would have been after the instruction by Major General Chen Wei to concentrate on Huanan Seafood Market cases.  I think this was a reasonable direction to take in the early period as there was a definite cluster from the Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market.

 

4.c. However, the alleged Covid19 had an incubation period of an average of 5 days (per WHO Situation Report 73 pg 2).  Everyone has been looking at the Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market but the virus if transmissible could have been contracted by a single person somewhere else. The information of Nobel prize winner Luc Montagnier that it came from a lab & the work of the “Origins of Covid Report” committee that also points in that direction of the Wuhan Institute of Virology are strongly clues in favour of the lab leak. The evidence is strong that the alleged novel (or new) coronavirus strain was at both locations. How then did the virus get from the lab & 15km & across a river to the Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market. Locals on one side of a river are unlikely to do major shop ups on the other side.  There had to be an animal/human host that travelled the distance in between. A human host that contracted the virus on the lab side of the river, but was not symptomatic because it takes 5 days to incubate.

 

4.d. Patient 3 was a younger male only 32 he presented at the same time as the hospital at the same time as patient 1 & 2 which means he deteriorated to a point of needing admission at the same rate as a man with cancer & liver disease & an older woman. We know patient 3 was not connected personally to the other two because if he was unable to communicate his health history one of the others would have done it for him (they advised their own health history). I think there is a good possibility that patient 3 had a higher viral load of the alleged Covid19 because he contracted it before the other two.

 

4.e.  Patient 3 did not have an obvious medical impairment that would have evidenced a weaker immune system or treating medics would have noted that on his file. Patient 3 was uncommunicative even after recovery.

 

4.d. I have considered pre-symptomatic transmission & the science for this argument is poor.

 

What we have to assume as a fact though based on information at hand  is from 20^th December 2019 to 12 Jan 2020 23days there was no Wuhan novel (or new) Covid19 only deaths only a man with severe comorbidities cancer and liver disease. No deaths in over 3weeks. From 31 December 2019 to 12 January 2020 when WHO was observing the cluster there was no Wuhan novel (or new) Covid19 only deaths only a man with severe comorbidities cancer and liver disease. Australia was allegedly recovering from a major Bushfire Australia January 2020 with multiple deaths & thousands no doubt with smoke inhalation damage that started December was this emergency real & where was WHO? NZ was experiencing its own multi casualty medical disaster with the White Island volcanic eruption that also started December was this emergency real & where was WHO? These were allegedly major medical disasters & WHO was watching a bad cold in China. Despite millions paid by both our countries we got at best a low-grade referral service to other agencies.

 

4.       Para7 Pic 6  “Symptom onset of the 41 confirmed nCoV cases ranges from 8 December 2019 to 2 January 2020. No additional cases have been detected since 3 January 2020”. The date of this report is 35 days or 7 weeks after the 8 December 2019 start. 41 cases of a “novel (or new) coronavirus across 7 weeks in cold & flu season in a Wuhan province of 11+M people is ridiculously low in a province where to quote again the 5^th Jan 2020 report “novel coronaviruses emerge periodically in different areas”. Calling a pandemic on this was taking the proverbial.

 

 

Had the WHO reports above or the details I’ve isolated from the reports been more visible it would have been clear to everyone there was no threat from Covid19 without further research. Most people like me only took a real interest in WHO 23 Jan 2020 when the Wuhan border went up.  At that time, we all nudged to the WHO Situation Reports that started with WHO Situation Report No. 1 published on 21 Jan 2020 based on data at hand “20 Jan 2020. Of course though, this “Situation” had been going since 8^th December 2019 as the 12 Jan 2020 Report clearly stated. WHO was doing somersaults to hide that.  WHO had created a nice little easy read report for the media. Not even Ebola rated a separate daily Situation Report from WHO. So why did the public get Situation Reports for coronavirus that had no known death threat unless serious comorbidities were present already in patients?  Answer - These reports were not there to inform, but were to purposefully mislead that Covid19 was a bigger threat than it was. WHO Situation Reports were composed by people using persuasive marketing techniques & were biasedly designed to inflate a threat from a normal mutation of a coronavirus in 2019 that was just not there.   

These facts come from considering WHO Situation Report No.1 with the knowledge of full contents of the 12 Jan 2020 report:-

1.      Pointer 2 shows the 12 Jan 2020 Report was at hand. At para 7 Pic 6 it gives a very clear situation repeating “Symptom onset of the 41 confirmed nCoV cases ranges from 8 December 2019 to 2 January 2020.  No additional cases have been detected since 2 January 2020”.  WHO left all these details out of their Situation Reports. It let the inflated initial 44 cases of the original cluster uncontested. By doing this the Situation Report failed to advise there were 3 other cases of another unknown strain. It is my opinion this was purposefully done to inflate the fear factor of their being just one “novel (new) virus”.  WHO left out of its report that the alleged abnormal “novel (new)” cases started 8 Dec 2019 giving readers  a false impression of a lot of cases in a short period of time. Unless WHO was providing other data the general public was not seeing to health departments across the world the WHO Situation Report No 1 was a shockingly poor report on the Covid19 situation.

 

2.       3 cases had been discounted as being Covid19 negative to the abnormal cluster after the WHO Press Release  “Pneumonia of an Unknown Cause”.  The burning question is what Covid19 test was done in the first instance because 12 days later approx. we have 3 cases still with Pneumonia of an Unknown Cause”.  The first test set regime was flawed with a 6,818 % error rate (44 cases & 3 found different).  The reduction to the no. of confirmed positive cases should have been shown in Situation Report No. 1, because it was this data that should have been key for modellers.  WHO demonstrated right from the start that it was not differentiating between positive & negative results to arrive at its Covid19 case numbers for its reports.

3.      12 Jan 2020 report Pic 7 dot point 1. By 12 Jan 2020 China had followed up on 763 close contacts & health workers & not one single additional Covid19 positive case was found. WHO Situation Report No 1` published 21 Jan 2020 ignored this altogether.  It did though cover the contract tracing done by Japan of their 1 alleged imported case in the Report. Of the 41 close cases they had access to 37 patients & none of them had symptoms. Had a reader of Situation Report No. 1 (& is natural to assume that that is the first Situation Report) known that China too had been contact testing & there was no spread all those nudges about Covid being a super spreader with two countries data that said no way would have fallen on deaf ears;

 

4.      The last para of Pic 8’s of WHO’s Situation Report No.1 shows 282 confirmed cases but when you read the 12 Jan 2020 report Pic 6 last para you are advised “No additional cases have been detected since 3 January 2020”. 3 to 12 Jan 2020 is a period of 9 days of no cases. WHO Situation Report 73 pg. 2 identifies an incubation period of on average 5-6 days. For a period well over the average incubation cycle when contact tracing of close contacts was prevalent there were no new cases. The disease was not spreading deadly enough that it was causing new cases presenting at hospitals. So how did we get from 41cases on 12 Jan 2020 to 282 cases by 20 Jan 2020? The simple answer is it was impossible & the case numbers on the WHO report were a piece of fictional fraud. Had the WHO Situation Report No. 1 correctly reported the finds of the 12 January 2020, another call could have been made but it clearly overinflated the risk.

 

5.      The WHO Situation Report No. 1 at point 1 notes WHO China Country Office was informed 31 Dec 2020 of 44 cases, but does not tell you WHO knew as at 12 Jan 2020 that the 44 cases started 8 Dec 2019. Using the worst-case super spreader scenario of a faster 5-day average incubation rate again by 12 Jan 2020 there had been 35days or 7 incubation cycles from 8 Dec 2019 to 12 Jan 2020. There were only 35 confirmed cases being treated (41 confirmed cases less 6 deceased). The claim that hospitals were going to be overwhelmed was just ridiculous; 

 

6.      12 Jan 2020 Report Pic6 last paragraph “six patients have been discharged”.  There was only one alleged death with serious comorbidities cancer & liver problems at that time.  Ergo these 6 didn’t get discharged via the morgue with only 1x death acknowledge.  How did they recover from a deadly super spreader, that supposedly had no cure? Patients either had natural immunity or were being given medications that successfully helped them fight off the alleged novel disease before WHO interfered.  Later you heard a lot about A-symptomatic cases that had no symptoms. Again, nothing was said about natural immunity being present. WHO Situation Report No.1 does not tell you that 6 people had recovered & been discharged, because it was written to persuade readers the threat was worse than it was. In point of fact WHO put out a report 10 May 2021 showing there was robust natural immunity (https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/341241). This natural immunity report was issued after the inoculation contracts had been signed by various countries. It kept being moved on WHO’s www so people had difficulty circulating the link on social media;

 

7.      There had been no new cases from 3 January up to 12 January 2020 & only one death from 20 Dec through to 12 Jan 2020 Patient 2 with cancer & liver problems.  In 8 days per Situation Report No. 1 from data the 12  January 2020 data of only 1 death with severe comorbidities in over a month (back to 8 December 2020). Situation Report No 1 though, based on data only 8 days after the 12 Jan 2020 Report goes from 1 death & no new cases in over an average incubation cycle to 6 deaths an increase of 5 deaths in only 8 days. This is the data that WHO has been telling people was the Covid19 story.   Really???? I mean Really???

 

 

Situation Report No 2 with data from the 21 January 2020 published on 22 January 2020.

  

These facts come from considering the Situation Report No.2: -

 

1.      There is no increase in the Wuhan death numbers from the day before & they still stand at 6 deaths. This was the early period of spread & in China’s cold & flu season. Had the alleged Covid`19 been exponentially spreading entering new areas we would have seen deaths also exponentially growing as the alleged Covid19 spread to the new areas too. That did not happen.

 

2.a. The alleged death numbers from Situation Report  did not increase.  However, at the time of this report & the data being assessed up to 21 Jan 2020 it is 22 days or more than 3 weeks after WHO had allegedly been informed of the cluster 31 December 2019.  Despite oversight by WHO Situation Report No.2 advises that of the 6 deaths advised across the two days only 5 case profiles of the 6 deaths are at hand.  

2.b. Consider the Report above  from the “Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team” submitted to NIH 20 Feb 2020 Patient 3 a 32yo man, was admitted & discharged 16 January 2020. Presumably at that time he was well enough to be  able to talk & provide a case history himself, but there was no case history. Here again among these 6 alleged dead Covid19 cases was a patient with no case profile either, but as this patient did not recover there was possibly no opportunity to get a case profile direct from the patient. How could there be 2x separate patients with no case profiles when most people have local doctors? I have a hypothesis that both of these males were transient workers. Wuhan is the capital city of the Hubei Province. Wuhan as a capital would be a magnet for transient workers travelling within their State like Province to find work.  Markets are a good source of casual work for young men with unloading produce & setting up stalls & serving on the stalls. I have come across a report on homelessness due to transient migrant workers & in Wuhan “the situation for homeless people was particularly bad”. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_China). If Patient 3 had been a homeless transient migrant worker it would account for why a younger man’s immune system was poor to fight off a virus.  If Patient 3 was a transient migrant worker it would also explain why despite recovering he was unable to communicate his own medical history – there was a language barrier.

2.c.  Anyone following Covid19 knows that most of the alleged cases via the WHO reports on the first cluster were from Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. What cannot be dismissed though, are the number of medical scientists like nobel prize winner Luc Montagnier defamed as a conspiracy theorist because clearly dying & with nothing to lose he called the virus had to have been developed in a laboratory. A lot of focus has been on USA Fauci’s alleged gain of function experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology thanks to USA politicians like Rand Paul. We have to now be looking at how the virus got from the lab to the market.

2.d.  If we assume the lab was the original source that is our real ground zero.  The question then becomes how did it get the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market The distance from lab to the market was 15km with a river ferry trip in between. The virus did not jump straight from the lab to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale market. There is another market that got absolutely no attention because all focus was placed on bats & pangolins & natural evolution. Only 800m from the lab is another market that is difficult to get details on  Wuhan Xiaohongshan Comprehensive Market situated G8PX+RHH, Bayi Rd, 洪山街道口商圈 Wuchang District, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 430071 situated at.  I called on Twitter’s Grok for answers on this entity & distance involving the Wuhan Institute of Virology. I think the answer could be in between both I considered the distance of the la have been had came from the. I put this hypothesis to Grok AI to test for missing flaws or missed information. There were no other details about the missing 6^th deceased or Patient 3 & the hypothes   I cannot prove it but it is highly plausible that the reason for the missing case profiles on both Patient 3 that survived and the 6^th deceased from Situation Reports 1 & 2 is they were likely both transient migrant workers & likely living rough, but still an in-patient. Patient 3 perhaps had a different dialect.

 

 

 

2.      So from the 6 deaths we have 4 with comorbidities & 1x likely weakened immunity migrant transient. We are left with only I person who had no prior contributing comorbidity factors and only one person in who we must assume died because of Covid not with Covid19. From 8 December to 21 Jan the date Stiuation report 2 data was based on is 44 days. Ergo only one death in a population of 11+M in winter in over 6 weeks. There is no way on this planet that anyone could claim that Covid19 was deadly & at only one death it did not transmit by itself as deadly to anyone else.  WHO never proved Covid19 transmitted deadly at all;

 

Pic10 is a simple comparison I did with WHO’s Hubei’s data in its Situation Report No.40 for 29 February & Situation Report No.55 dated 15 March 2020. Situation Report 40 shows total alleged confirmed Covid19 cases since the start of Covid19 8 Dec 2019 in Hubei with a population of 59,170,000 were only 66337.  Note how the only column in the Situation Report that is in lots of 10K is the population size. This is a persuasive marketing trick, so that you visually register only a population of 5917 making the death number look more frightening.  The Covid19 confirmed cases to population was only 0.112% of which there were all those positive cases with no symptoms.  99.888% of the Hubei population were not even registered as cases. The total dead was only 2727 in a population of 59,170,000 ergo 0.005%. A total of 99.995% of the Hubei population had survived the alleged highly deadly super spreader with surface life uninoculated by 29 February 2020. Ergo natural immunity was proved robust by 29 February 2020. The incubation cycle was 5 days & yet 3 cycles later on 15 March 2020 at Situation Report 55 there is only an increase of confirmed cases of 1457. At this time citizens across the world were being bombarded by exponential growth rubbish. The scene was being set that despite people not dropping dead in streets & hospitals not being overwhelmed by the sheer no.’s of cases a fraudulent hoax pandemic was in motion.  To be very clear 11 March 2020 with the 29 February 2020 data at hand WHO fraudulently called a Covid19 pandemic.

 Pic10

 

8.       12 Jan 2020 Report Pic 6 para 5 - “China shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus on 12 January, which will be of great importance for other countries to use in developing specific diagnostic kits.”. This was covered in WHO Situation Report No.1.  The test kits were still being developed they were not gold standards at all, but experimental. WHO kept pushing for the use of tests that it knew were still in a developmental phase. The release & report does not say how China shared what was the original sequence.   Dr Martin from the Reiner Fuellmich team showed the gene sequence was patented in 2002 (18years before COVID-19).  Shortly after it was aired, Washington Post raised some anomalies in WHO’s stories.  WHO corrected the record (after) & notified there was a case a week with the new estimated start date now on 8 December, 2019 (same date as the 12 Jan 2020 Report), & 3 of the first 13 early cases were from across the river in Wuchang in the Jiangxia district & it’s a different original virus/genomic sequence. Dr John Campbell uploaded to You Tube a video on 17 July, 2021, in which he notes he filmed it 16 July, 2021 (ref point is 17:47-23:3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCdTHgRSs3o). In short, we had experimental PCR test kits set to detect anyone’s guess what viral sequence.

Pic11

 

Pic12

 

 

9.      Para2 of WHO’s Risk Assessment quote, “Wuhan city is a major domestic and international transport hub. To date, there have been no reported cases outside of Wuhan City”. The 12 Jan 2020 WHO bulletin was telling everyone that read it Covid19 was not a super spreader. The border went up around Wuhan Hubei 23 Jan 2020, so Covid had been free to circulate from 8 Dec 2020 to 23 Jan 2020. By 29 Feb 2020 (WHO Situation Report No. 40) 96.088% of China’s alleged Covid19 deceased were still in Hubei. The alleged Covid19 had not spread even in China, so how did it spread to multiple countries? The simple answer is, it was impossible.

 Pic 13

 

Pic14

5. Para 4 there had only been one Covid19 death after 13 days in a Hubei population of 59+M in the middle of cold & flu season. The patient was part of the first cluster & ergo had pneumonia but they also had serious underlying medical conditions after 2.5cycles of a 5 day average incubation period (WHO's incubation cycle per its Situation Report 73 pg2. There was never a case on this basis for any novel coronavirus response measures based on the disease being a threat to mortality.

 

 

Safe & Effective

 

The Covid19 inoculations were for a specific purpose – inoculating against the novel strain of a coronavirus that was detected in Wuhan China 31^st December, 2019.  Pharmaceutical companies have a duty of care to perform a risk/benefit analysis on their products.  If that novel strain was never a highly lethal super spreader & in fact did not spread person to person at all then the inoculations were borne from fraud. Fraud voids all contracts & immunities. I have proven herein that fraud occurred with manipulation of data and that it was impounded by unethical persuasive psychology & censorship.  I have shown that WHO knew 12 Jan that it was not the alleged highly lethal super spreader & that should have been patently clear from doing a risk/benefit analysis. With the knowledge that knowledge that was available Covid19 inoculations were both procured & rolled out with a knowledge that harm would occur. No medical procedure comes without risk.

 

Govts’ regulators have a duty of care to show they used an unbiased source to determine if pharmaceutical products are “Safe & Effective”. It is in the financial interest of all govts to require that pharmaceutical companies & World Health Organisation (WHO) prove that they did a full & proper risk/benefit analysis. Such analysis of course would start with establishing that Covid19 was an unquestionable novel deadly super spreader.  Public purses across the globe picked up the cost of purchase & the compensation costs from patients determined as being harmed by Covid19 inoculations. I intend to prove that Covid19 was not the real novel deadly super spreader as was alleged & that it was just another annual minor coronavirus variation/mutation. This puts the onus fair & square on pharmaceutical companies to prove a proper risk/benefit analysis was done and they did not corrupt govt committees.

 

Politicians & health professionals the world over abandoned the usual public message that every medical treatment comes with risk for “Safe & Effective”. “Safe & Effective” was in countries where health committees are made up of big pharma compromised individuals. To be Safe &  Effective valid even as an emergency use authorized  (EUA) drug there has to be “as little bias as possible”. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0190962203500263).   

 

NZ’s first year of requiring pharmaceutical companies to report payments to doctors was 2021. In NZ the inoculation was rolled out February 2021. The inoculations were developed in 2020 & payments would have been made for trials likely in 2020.   Even in 2024 though cracks in the new system were emerging.  https://theconversation.com/nzs-new-disclosure-scheme-for-pharma-payments-to-doctors-falls-short-of-best-practice-225457).

The alleged novel Covid19 was not a super spreader & it was not deadly

All along the information was there that Covid19 was not a person to person super spreader. All along the information was there that surface life transmission was poor. All along the information was there that the data coming out from WHO was low grade considering the millions that have been given it.

In order for a vaccine to be effective it needs to stop transmission or prevent the person receiving the vaccination from getting a disease.  The NZ adverse Pfizer director has admitted in questioning by Rob Roos, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, that "at the time of introduction, the vaccine had never been tested on stopping the transmission of the virus". According to Professor Julie Leask, the before-market trials of COVID-19 vaccines had a "primary outcome of reducing risk of any disease and severe disease, but not transmission". "It was never guaranteed the vaccine would give sterilising immunity," Professor Leask said in a statement. If a  disease has “no clear evidence that the virus passes easily from person to person” then there is a more likely source of bacterial infection of food, water or a lableak. None of these though would see spread to other countries unless person to person transmission or surface life infection was viable. At no time did WHO ever prove that occurred.

Any ethical govt health dept or pharmaceutical company doing a risk/benefit analysis should very quickly have arrived at the conclusion 12 Jan 2020 that with 763 close contacts not Covid19 positive after more than 2 incubation cycles & (para Covid19 was not a risk that lives needed to be saved from.

Any risk/benefit analysis would first start with establishing if there was an actual risk from Covid19. Most of us were first introduced to World Health Organisation (WHO) by their health ministries in Covid19. Covid19 was WHO’s declared pandemic. It is natural therefor that their Situation Reports are the primary source of data to consider. I modelled Covid19 in real-time & it was WHO’s data I considered at first when it was available.

 

Situation Report No. 1 was published on 21 Jan 2020 & it was based on data from 20^th Jan 2020. The report advised that the Situation had been first identified with a cluster of 44 at Wuhan Hubei hospital across 31^st Dec 2019-3^rd Jan 2020. This was the cluster from the WHO press release 5^th Jan 2020 as Pneumonia of an Unknown Cause.

 

By 21^st Jan 2020 when WHO published Situation Report No.1 the “unknown cause” had been identified as shown by its heading as a “Novel Coronavirus”. Not a novel influenza or a novel strain of influenza A. That is important because unless it was an influenza A variant there was absolutely no basis for WHO to have called any pandemic at all based on historical definitions. 

 

.

There was never a definition of a pandemic coronavirus. WHO had had also attempted a round table previously to set the parameters for pandemic influenza, but could not get consensus. A pandemic for coronavirus does not exist & therefore could not legally be used as an excuse for any government actions.

 

 

 

Further in consideration of it being a general pandemic Covid19 fails all 4 of pandemic key requirements

:-

1.      Dot point 1 - At Situation Report 1 it is identified as a coronavirus a separate viral family from influenza which is the Orthomyxoviridae family it was not influenza A;

2.      Dot point 2 - By Situation Report No. 1 based on data from 20^th Jan 2020 which was 3weeks after the 31 Dec 2019 start there were only 282 cases in a population of 11+M. There was robust population immunity & negligible proven deadly transmission based on the low number of presents at the Wuhan hospital;

3.      Dot point 3 - At only 6 deaths with no mention of comorbidities or ages in cold & flu season in 3 weeks there was negligible morbidity/mortality;

4.      Dot point 4 - Spreads easily from person to person was never tested for. Eu’s Rob Roos’ questioning of Pfizer shows stopping transmission was never considered an issue. I will however prove below across Situation Reports 2 & 3 that WHO never proved any deadly transmission had even occurred once person to person. WHO’s update reported by CDC on 14 Jan 2020 shows only possible transmission after over 5weeks from 8 Dec 2019 (not confirmed) & based its decision at that time on other respiratory pathogens for transmission but ignored  that coronavirus includes the less threatening common cold.

 

WHO’s Situation Report No. 1 showed 6 deaths, but by Situation Report 2 it was still only reporting 6 deaths. Further by Situation Report No. 2 case histories for 5 of those 6 were available showing only one had no underlying comorbidities. Underlying comorbidities are conditions that can significantly affect how a patient responds to treatment or experiences complications eg for a viral disease asthma would make treatment difficult.  We already know the 44 patients the subject of the alleged first Wuhan cluster had pneumonia from the 5^th Jan 2020 Press Release so the first cluster was of 44 people with both Coronavirus & pneumonia. If there were only 6 dead after just over 3 weeks by Situation Report No. 2 most people were surviving Covid19 with Chinese hospitals treatment. Ergo by Situation Report No. 2 WHO already knew that Covid19 was not by all former agreed definitions a pandemic.  WHO also knew that at best with only 2 deceased (1 case file still not considered) without underlying comorbidities at 21^st Jan 2020 Covid19 was not deadly to most people. As the 6^th file details were never supplied WHO never proved deadly transmission to a single person of the alleged novel strain.

 

By Situation Report 3 we should have been seeing the details from that 6^th case file. Instead though, we were given a report where the data was completely distorted. The publishing schedule had suspiciously changed & reports were printed the same day as the data. From 31^st Dec 2019 to 21st Jan 2020 data there had been 3 weeks to get to at best 2 deadly novel Covid19 patients without underlying comorbidities, but by 23 Jan 2020 only 2 days we had a jump up to 17 deaths. The 17 deaths were not on Situation Report 3 when I did the schedule of WHO’s first 14 day below.  I had to work back from the data given & note there is also a mistake on the spelling of Hubei as “Wubei” on the last line of the screen capture.  This entire report was changed & messed with because people realised a lot like me would have been questioning a jump to 23 dead patients from only at best 2. On Twitter when I was querying the ridiculous jump in the numbers excuses were floated of tests being done in batches. It takes a day to do a live patient PCR swab & get the results back.  These people allegedly went into that Wuhan hospital alive enough that they could have had a nasal swab. This was the first cluster even if blood genetics needed to be done those results would have been well at hand more than 3 weeks later. This data was just bullsh*t. Modellers all over the world in health depts would have been looking, seeing & swearing the same as me. An entire days’ worth of WHO’s data is gone for the 22^nd January 2020 & removed with it the 6^th file case details. WHO never proved person to person deadly transmission of the original alleged novel strain because we do not know if the 6^th case file showed they had underlying comorbidities.  Anyone trying to prove a risk/benefit analysis of any Covid19 inoculation for the novel rapidly mutating coronavirus would fail at the first hurdle to prove there was ever a threat using what should be the primary source of global health data.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The schedule below was a crude look at the death numbers as they arose on WHO Situation Reports in the first 14 days. It is pretty obvious there is no way on this planet that people claiming they were exponentially modelling Covid19 successfully were telling the truth. Exponential growth increases at a consistent rate of increase. If exponential modelling was possible & Covid19 was the real global super spreader deadly threat, you would have seen a consistent increase rate day upon day as it was entering countries for the first time. Like any other disease it is the elderly & vulnerable succumb quickly to disease & present at hospitals early creating the first wave. Across the 14 days Covid19 had allegedly spread to 14 countries. In Situation Report 73 pg 2 WHO advised the average incubation period was 5 days down from 9-14 days. So, we are looking at in this schedule WHO’s worst case scenario of 14 days death results with the hindsight knowledge that the real incubation period was 5 days average. Even at the worst-case scenario these figures show deplorable fraud.  Just in the first 5 days:- 1. Day 1 – only 6 deaths of a highly deadly superspreader the had incubated once at the worst-case scenario with a 44 cluster by 3^rd Jan 2020 per the Pneumonia of unknown cause press release; 2. Day 2 no increase in death numbers & the advice that at least 4 of those 6 had comorbidities that should have reduced the death numbers or off set them; 3. Day 3 data for 22 Jan 2020 removed altogether with a highly suspicious change of WHO’s publishing schedule & no 6^th file produced; 4. Day 4 data now Situation Report No. 3  showing a deceased number increase far in excess of what prior patterns had shown & highly questionable initial no 23 by calculation but reported now as 17 a decrease of 6 which coincidentally matches the first followed 6 deaths.

.

 

If this was an exponentially growing untreatable no immunity super spreader the deaths would have been increasing exponentially like the cases were. By 31 Jan 2020 there was an increase of only 1 death in 24 hours with now 19 countries the alleged Covid19 had spread to. The myths that there was an abnormal wave & that vulnerables were an at-risk group to Covid19 itself was busted. Every year we see waves for colds & flu & vulnerables with low immunity are the first to succumb creating the wave. As the alleged novel disease spread to the different countries, we should have vulnerable deaths peaking at the start across them increasing death numbers. Numbers should have been through the roof in all those countries at the start of the alleged pandemic. The claims of politicians & public servants the world over that people were being locked down to “Protect Others” eg Ardern’s “Stay at home to save lives” was just plain lies.

 

So, what was really happening at WHO on 22^nd January, 2020?  One thing we are told is WHO’s International Health Regulation Committee (IHRC) met & decided not to declare a public health emergency for Covid19 & looking at the figures for the first two days who can blame them.  The WHO Situation Report No 73 pg2 5 day average incubation period means at 22^nd Jan 2020 from a 31 Dec 2019 start 4.5 incubation cycles had past. I cannot prove it, but I would put money on betting that 6^th  case file had emerged on 22 January 2020 showing that the deceased patient had underlying comorbities & had not transmited deadly to a single person.  Quoting the press statement on this telecon meeting “the Emergency Committee expressed divergent views on whether this event constitutes a PHEIC or not. At that time, the advice was that the event did not constitute a PHEIC”.  I’m not medically trained, but I’m pretty sure it should be obvious, that if you have to have a meeting, to try & decide if a disease has pandemic qualities 3.5 weeks after it started & you can’t get agreement, you are not in the middle of a pandemic.  In fact, so lack lustre was Covid19 as a potential health risk instead of daily meetings in our age of online communiques, attendees were confident even without an available inoculation they would still be alive to meet in another 10 days’ time. I’m sure this extension was an enormous relief to its head Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus who never missed a political beat & was an attendee at the WEF Davos held 20-24 Jan 2020.  It is only after the WHO IHRC meeting on 22 January 2020 that the Covid19 alleged novel coronavirus strain that mutates fast started to show increased death numbers.  (https://www.who.int/news/item/23-01-2020-statement-on-the-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)).

 

 

Models provided to the public from their govts were part of the fraud. Below is a sample of NZ data. Like Australian data it has been produced using persuasive marketing & modelling to obscure key details. In this report there are 121 references to “cases” & only 17 to “deaths”.  By 29 Sep 2020, after cold/flu season this report shows only 25 alleged novel Covid19 NZ deaths (ages/comorbidities ignored).  These numbers are 9 months after the start of the alleged Covid19 & after the NZ winter. Even on these numbers Covid19 was no deadly superspreader. This was a disease that had pneumonia. Ergo the reference to 1 Million deaths globally being surpassed for Covid19 shows utter medical naivety.  Every year  there are per Google AI’s quick check around 3M adults deaths from pneumonia alone.  From the start to this point there was never a medical case for NZ lockdowns for the novel coronavirus.  https://www.policycommons.ac.nz/covid-19-policy-resources/covid-19-timeline/covid-19-timeline-2020/

  

 

A lot of tweeters from different countries (UK, Spain, India, Korea, ME etc) exponentially modelling Covid19 tweeted me their homemade efforts. Some people adopted mine because it was a simple to use quantitative with death numbers model. There are many factors that affect & interfere with exponential spread rate eg:- 1. Aging; 2. Country entry points (landlocked/island); 3. Climate; 4. Health system funding; population density etc.  Everyone was trying to base their exponential spread on a disease from allegedly Wuhan. Everyone already had a start date of 31^st Dec 2020 but early models I saw all forgot to allow for the incubation period of patient zero that resulted in the first cluster also incubating then presenting at the hospital. It wasn’t until early Feb 2020 that the first news reports of the 9-14-day estimates on incubation hit the media. If you do not have that date telling you when people are symptomatic eg sneezing & spreading virus how can you possible exponentially model a rate of spread. We all got that A-symptomatic rubbish as yet another fraud to cover the fact the exponential modelling of Armageddon case numbers was plausible. So you had an imaginary qualitatively modelled exponential spread supported by psychologically nudged doctors using a PCR tests that was so bad it gave a positive result to fruit juice in Magufuli’s tests. (https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851/rapid-responses)

 

 

 

Immediately for English speaking countries & in fact any countries that did not speak Chinese trying to research was difficult. If you were planning a hoax, you could not have picked a better country to limit real information getting out, because of the difference in language & location.  It was not the capital where people are more likely to have visited & there would be more English speakers. You cannot lie with numbers though.

 

By May 2020 people were calling out the Imperial College models that the govt relied on as rubbish (eg https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/failures-influential-covid-19-model-used-justify-lockdowns). Quote - “Winsberg at al. criticise two aspects of the ICL model – the sparse and unreliable data which formed a basis for projections, and the projections themselves”. This quote is from a factcheck that was to purposefully discredit the UK Winsberg at al report. I’m providing the fact check of that to show what real truthers are still being subjected to (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/covid19/2021/05/06/bad-data-and-flawed-models-fact-checking-a-case-against-lockdowns/).  All the models I looked at in Covid19 on Twitter & the govt health sites were poorly researched & calculated garbage.  A quote from the fact checkers in the block states “It’s certainly true that these numbers were overblown – but they don’t mention the actual figures used by the ICL modellers”. The figures of Covid19 experts eg WHO as I have shown above were continually being changed to suit. That was purposefully being done to enable biased social media censorships of reports in social media & I will provide another example of that herein. The fact check downplayed the most important part that the figures in Covid19 were overblown rubbish in its Conclusion because it was never about exposing the truth of the low risk of Covid19 & always was about discrediting people rightfully warning others that Covid19 was a hoax & fraud. I in fact used the term “overblown” myself in the first line of my submission to Australia’s Royal Commissions Part 2 to Aged/Disabled lodged Feb 2021 to warn them “Section 1 - COVID19 is an overblown threat!”.  (https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2023/10/covid19-royal-commission-submission.html).  This fact check was dated 6 May 2021. At that time the information had been on the UK’s health depts site that Covid19 was not a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID) for over a year. Yet the information that the Covid19 modeled figures were overblown from the Conclusion the place most busy researchers would skip to in favour of a slam piece against Winsberg at al.

 

Australia’s first models were just a ridiculously pile of unreconciled nonsense with graphs & numbers that did not reconcile with each other & showed the modelers Doherty’s Institute had only basic level excel skills & low-grade rationale. The figures show the Australian govt’s modellers couldn’t even reconcile up to 56 dead bodies that weren’t moving anywhere.  I had to get out a ruler & measure the graph columns to identify their numbers because the graph bars did not even have data labels. It is my opinion the were purposefully left off  because they were aware the numbers did not reconcile. Like NZ our first Covid19 death was March 2020 so a lot of people had a lot of time to prepare models to track Covid19 deaths. I submitted these samples to Australia’s Senate first 27 May 2020.

 

Now the WHO Situation Report for the 24 Jan 2020 is telling me it was published on the same day as the data was collated. It advises the death no. for the 24th is only 25 (not 28). The death no. for 25 Jan 2020 publishing date 25^th Jan 2020 is 41 (not 28). The figure of 28 has disappeared from records.  Neither of these reports had a simple date change. The data was changed in an act of fraud. There is an incredible unexplained spike in death no.’s now between 24 and 25 Jan 2020 to inflate a threat that was never there from the start.  WHO Situation Report No.1 for data of the 20^th Jan 2020 was only 6 alleged novel Covid19 deaths. That is 6 only alleged novel Covid19 deaths after 3 weeks from the 31^st Dec 2019 when the first novel strain cluster started to present. And yet in only 4 days there were 35 alleged novel Covid19 deaths to add to it.

 

There are always footprints. As I advised in the first 14 days of WHO schedule there were no Situation Reports from the 25-27 Jan 2020 publicly published. I tweeted with another sock puppet about the lack of reports.  From an emergency report stand point it was bizarre. The borders went up quarantining Wuhan 23 Jan 2020. WHO though had already established a communications network prior evidenced by the Situation Report published 21 Jan 2020 with data from the day before. I have been on an endurance testing weekend after being involved in a real activation 5 days solid. There is no way people would have been stood down from duty after only 2 days if this was a real emergency. These were likely heavy party drinker weekends & ergo high-risk medical weekends.  Hospitals would have prepared rosters ahead for as many hands-on decks as possible.  This was an alleged global emergency threat & yet 2 days into this quarantine tools were down for what just coincidentally was the Chinese New Year & Australia Day long weekend. I tweeted with another person in my old suspended Twitter account about the lack of reports across this weekend. I screen captured it before I was permanently suspended incognito as I realised its importance.

 

 

.

I will show that Covid19 was a crime & fraud from the start aided & abetted by World Health Organisation (WHO) & the World Economic Forum (WEF) for nefarious purposes.

 

I spotted Covid19 was a hoax immediately. The picture below was my first crude model showing the alleged disease was no threat. My first submission to the Australian govt was Senate Covid 27 May 2020. My submission was rejected in November 2020. As part of my submission among other medical calls I estimated 55 only alleged Covid19 deaths for Australia at the worst without intervention. This figure was proven plausible by Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released October 2020 to be discussed further & I was proven correct on surface life estimates & recurrency also known as reinfection. Let me be very clear the Australian Senate Covid19 inquiry & the public servant assigned to it rejected a medically 100% correct submission that also included links to who ramped up the hoax after proven correct. It was rejected in favour of submissions from people that were predicting a ridiculous number of Covid19 deceased that had already been disproved in order to keep the hoax of Covid19 continuing.  This was before any inoculations had occurred. Published submissions include Qld Govt to try & stop the Qld medical apartheid being continued (https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/CSSC-0A12/PHOLEEPAB2-2469/submissions/00000754.pdf). A submission to PM & Cabinet’s Covid19 inquiry who accepted public my submission & published it, but massively censored screen captures & gave it the number 1984.  It is now held by Trove with all the other submissions (https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20241224043730mp_/https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-1984.pdf).   My last submission was to Senate Excess Mortality. With the exception of a prominent solicitor key researchers disproving Covid19 all received the same response refusing their submissions. In all the time I have been a welfare advocate I think this was the first time I’ve seen the Senator that called for the inquiry being the person that submitted a dissenting view of it.

 

In Australia the correct information on Covid19 is still being censored as misinformation by our bipartisan Labor & LNP coalition govts. The parties & their State counterparts were all party to the National Cabinet that was found unlawful in court. (https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/australian-politics/2021/08/06/national-cabinet-secrecy.  The National Cabinet was formed 13 March 2020. This was same date UK’s Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) formerly met & deemed Covid19 was not a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID). That was a formality decision.  The minutes from UK’s New & Emerging Respiratory Virus Threat (NERVTAG) clearly show they had the ACDP information at 11am when they held their ninth meeting by telecon. Page 2 second last paragraph shows ACDP & UK’s SAGE had already downgraded the threat of Covid19. (https://minhalexander.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/nervtag-9-minutes_13-march-2020.pdf). So, Australian politicians formed the unlawful Cabinet for absolutely no emergency reason at all. The State Premiers thereat went on to implement international human rights abuses against their citizens wrecking our economy. New Zealand was part of the Australia/NZ bubble. It would have been privy to the same information as Australia.

 

 

Though the minutes of the ACDP meeting have not been verified from a govt source the letter has been verified in a UK Freefom of Information Request

 

 

 

I put it to the Commission though Peter Dutton MP at that time the Minister for Home Affairs had the information that Covid19 had been downgraded to not HCID 12 March 2020. That is significant for both our countries, because our National Cabinet was later found unlawful and was formed 13 March 2020 in the knowledge that Covid19 was no threat. Our borders were closed on 20^th March 2020 as a result of the National Cabinet decision following the Ruby Princess docking on 19 March 2020 that was no threat. Dutton is now the leader of our opposition party Liberals.

 

When I first saw the UK’s public press release below it was dated the 18^th March 2020. I was not the only one to see that 18^th March date. The picture below is a screen capture from NZ company Fuseworks Media. New Zealand (NZ) is 13 hours ahead of UK & 3 hours ahead of Sydney Australia. I believe in light of the weekend being 14^th & 15^th March & weather reasons dominating message flows its plausible Ruby Princess may have left NZ unaware of ACDP UK meeting, as bad weather may have gained priority in emergency communications. What is not plausible is that NZ & Australian ports authorities & immigration did not have the information that Covid19 was not an abnormal threat when it sailed into Sydney on the 19^th March 2020. There was a public Press Release in place already on the 18th March the day before. As 5 eyes partners both NZ & Australia govts had that information. Both went along with the charade that saw Sydney locked down for a non-existent threat.

 

 

The ACDP advice on the downgrade to not HCID appears half way down the page of the UK’s health departments press release in this link (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid) now dated the 19^th March 2020. That advice though came from the 13^th March 2020 meetings. The date of this press release was changed like many of the dates in Covid19 to fit the Covid19 hoax scenario.   

 

Killer Covid19 cruise hoaxes were ripe in Covid19. Following the Diamond Princess Feb 2020 Covid19 cruise outbreak. According to Wikipedia by June 2020 there had been 40 cases of Covid19 cruise ship threats. When further in this submission you see that I can prove Covid19 was a hoax all along, you’ll realise Covid19 was an act of economic terrorism intent on destroying the economies of Australia, New Zealand & in fact all Southern hemisphere countries that rely heavily on the island-hopping tourism industry. Per Tourism NZ “Before COVID-19, tourism was New Zealand's largest export industry and delivered $40.9 billion to the country. Tourism makes a significant positive impact on regional economies by directly and indirectly employing 1 in 9 New Zealanders.” Per NZ Immigration & tourism report “The outlook for New Zealand-Aotearoa tourism….But the impact of COVID-19 on the tourism sector has been severe. International visitor arrivals to New Zealand decreased 98.6% and the number of people directly employed in tourism decreased by a third.” (https://www.mbie.govt.nz/immigration-and-tourism/tourism/tourism-projects/governments-tourism-snapshot/the-outlook-for-new-zealand-aotearoa-tourism).

 

The Southern Hemisphere is half the world, but holds only 10% of its population. An economic attack on us rendering us open to the need for financial support literally gives the defence of the region to the highest bidder. They don’t need to invade us they can buy us.  Though I will discuss modelling further the very fact that only 10% of the population is in the Southern hemisphere should have told a lot of modellers very quickly that it was impossible to exponentially model an equal spread rate across the globe. So what were they really modelling?

 

Dates regularly changed on govt documents, press releases & even World Health Organisation (WHO)’s data in Covid19.  WHO was regularly changing its published Covid19 Situation Report data after the fact & to fit the hoax. WHO was doing that to support the political, financial & legal protection interests of others.  A lot of these changes left footprints in:- Google search; private social media accounts of people like me; & in WHO’s own Situation Reports. I will be referring to some of those changes throughout the submission. They present a case that every English-speaking country should withdraw from WHO immediately & consider suing them for membership fraud for misrepresenting their intents.

 

Before social media permanently suspended my old Twitter account “democracydemon2” on 30 Dec 2020, I managed to screen capture some of my key pictures incognito while in review. This suspension was just before the suspension of Trump Jan 6 2021 followers & it is my belief that some of those permanent suspensions were also about hiding the information that Covid19 was a hoax.  Trump’s followers & many Republicans were looking into Covid19. Despite having a new owner of Twitter X Musk, neither of my original Twitter accounts have been restored. To this day they remain suspended. My @democracy2 account was a paid subscription. I  was reported by a non-paying parody account made of me that is still active on Twitter X using my photos & bragging about getting me suspended (https://x.com/democracycooker).  Yes, I wasted my time & applied for a review I knew I was never going to get. My review took the responder about 1minute to forward my rejection email.

  

 

In addition to pharmaceutical companies being major political party donors, they have also been supporting the creation of online BOTs & trolls farms like the Observatory. They have been using nudge techniques to unethically promote non-existent health threats in order to increase pharmaceutical sales.

 

The pharmaceutical companies have been also compromising Universities with medical grants eg Harvard https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/4/23/hms-biopharma-funding/.  The beneficial necessity of the funding has influenced the direction of other areas within the Universities. One of these areas is in political science & election influencing. The Harvard Kennedy School Belfer Centre put out a 2-part Election Influencers Handbook that identified people opposing the Covid19 rhetoric as misinformation influencers (bottom of pg 8 part 1).  (https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/IO%20Playbook%202%20Part%201.pdf).  I have included a picture of s1.1.2 from my publicly available govt submission 84 to the Inquiry of social media & Online Safety, because part 2 of the handbook is no longer available. Harvard Kennedy were training their students to pack attack people online that they allege were spreading their version of misinformation. The identification of Covid19 as an election influential topic meant they deemed anyone opposing the Covid19 is a real threat rhetoric was a risk. The term “target” was used 21 times & “respond” 29 times within part 2. This bunch of Harvard Kennedy b!@#$%stards targeted & responded to online experts warning people of the Covid19 risks like Luc Montagnier who died with shameful obituaries saying he was a Covid19 conspiracy theorist instead of the genius that worked on AIDs.

 

Former NZ PM Jacinda Ardern NZ’s “single source of truth” went to work at Harvard Kennedy after resigning from politics. Per the Guardian, “She will focus on the study of online extremism at the law school, and on building leadership and governance skills at the Kennedy School.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/26/jacinda-ardern-takes-up-leadership-and-online-extremism-roles-at-harvard.  Snopes fact checkers fact checked the source of the comment “single source of truth” that was circulated in 2022. They found it was actually from 19 March 2020, the same day Ruby Princess supposedly sailed into Sydney, Australia. 6 days after 13^th March 2020 when UK in the same Hemisphere & with the same seasons as China had downgraded Covid19 as not HCID.  (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jacinda-ardern-truth/).

 

I admit to running out of time but I could have included another thousand pages with more info.  Following are links of just some of my Aussie submissions. PM & Cabinet gave me the 1984 submission & Facebook has defamed me as dangerous. The list below makes me look obsessed. When you know that people are being murdered for a fraud & your govt is doing nothing but attacking you for pointing out what is the obvious wouldn’t you be obsessive too. I highly recommend NZ leaves WEF & WHO.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

 

Senate Covid19 lodged 27 May 2020

https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2022/05/senate-covid-australia-lodged-27-may.html

 

Royal Commissions Aged/Disabled lodged Feb 2021

https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2023/10/covid19-royal-commission-submission.html

 

Royal Commissions Disabled Update lodged Feb 2022

https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2022/02/covid-19-update.html

 

Qld Govt lodged 4 March 2022

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/CSSC-0A12/PHOLEEPAB2-2469/submissions/00000754.pdf

 

PM & Cabinet inquiry lodged 2024

https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20241224043730mp_/https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-1984.pdf

 

Senate Excess Mortality lodged 17 May 2024

https://democracydemon1.blogspot.com/2025/02/submission-to-australias-senate-excess.html