A few hours ago on 27 February 2024, the Supreme Court of the state of Queensland held that "COVID-19 vaccine mandates for Queensland police and ambulance service workers were made unlawfully".

But the news will hardly get out to anyone. THE AGE had the story buried a couple of layers down in a sub-menu of Queensland news. And news.com.au did report the story, the the link was not even on their sub-menu Queensland page.

The Media does NOT want the masses i.e. you, to know of this.

I pondered why would the Media try to hide this? Possibly because the ruling reflects badly on the Media as well, since the Media were front and centre in promoting the mandates.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/queensland/police-service-health-department-bungled-vaccine-mandates-judge-finds-20240227-p5f85p.html

https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/news/qld-cops-health-workers-fighting-covid-jab-mandate-granted-temporary-lifeline-by-court/news-story/bb9f784a3c3ea1f36c6221fb5024f666

Can all finally accept mandates were unjustified now?
Its ok to admit you were wrong.
I understand it is difficult when fear sets in and government scares you at every angle.

Thats why you must continue to ask questions..

Mandates were 100% totally unjustified. And unlawful.
Sadly a lot of people participated in this unlawful act... and actually demanded worse for those people choosing not to take the "vaccine".

The mandates were unlawful? how? 

let's do a deal, I will say vaccine mandates were wrong if you say that largely vaccines are completely harmless and have resulted in saving millions of lives, espcially in places liek latin america where the health system couldn't cope with the amount of sick

in hindsight if less people got the vaccine we'd certainly have less stupid people so you make a good argument against madates 

In your two above posts, you list reasons why you think the Mandates were good.

If, in the alternative, you take every statement you made - and reverse it  -- there is actually 2 years worth of scientific evidence to back up the opposite of what you wrote.

In that alternative scenario, people should have been given a choice whether to take a dangerous, newly experimental, inadequately-tested drug.

For example, Melbourne University, Queensland University and Flinders University researchers made a review of peer-reviewed data on the danger of Covid vaccines. (August 2023)

https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/11/8/2287

In summary, tsf, do not pretend that there is no substantial evidence of the dangers of the COVID vaccines. If you wish to offer your Mainstream opinion, at least acknowledge the evidence from the other side. Acknowledge that there are 2 sides to this debate.

Unlawful as found in QLD supreme court for those that challenged them.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/they-lied-vaccine-mandates-for-queensland-police-and-ambulance-ruled-unlawful/news-story/debec3c7b28f9eba176fb5c62ac46fda

A lot of people lost their jobs (or were forced to take the vaccine to keep their jobs).
Ludicrous.

There is no deal to be done.
Vaccine mandates were unjustified in most areas. I'll give you aged care.
Let people decide what is best for them for a flu.

The covid vaccine was NOT "COMPLETELY HARMLESS". Some did have negative affects.
On the current evidence I'll give you "Mostly harmless".
But there is no way you can claim 100% safe and effective.

CAn you please provide some info on vaccine saving "millions of lives" in latin America?
Biggest uptakes of vax was in western world.

How to admit you got mandates wrong. 
The adult version 

https://twitter.com/TheMilkBarTV/status/1763071130326491270?s=19

It really isn't that hard. 
Some people were and are still heavily invested and felt strongly about their stance and can't, or won't, change their minds. 
Quite sad 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/what-happened-after-a-man-was-vaccinated-217-times-20240307-p5famb.html

By the time the doctors first saw him, the 62-year-old man had received 215 doses of coronavirus vaccine, they said. Flouting their pleas to stop, he received another two shots in the next months, expanding his immunological stockpile to a combined 217 doses of eight different COVID vaccine types over 2½ years.


Drop the link into this if it won't open. https://12ft.io

There have been two court rulings in 2024 showing that the Covid mandates were unlawful.

There Queensland case and the South Australian case:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13129451/Covid-vaccine-mandate-illegal-police-ambulance.html

Here is the South Australian case:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-31/sa-government-employee-wins-compensation-after-covid-vaccine/103408524

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/SAET_2024_2.pdf

People like tsf and Muz operate on the basis of mocking people, asserting that the Mainstream Media and government doctors would NEVER EVER get it wrong. So whenever someone gives them scientific journal articles on the latest emerging evidence, tsf and Muz just mock and insult those who are bringing the evidence. People like Muz and tsf, they don't operate on facts and data - because their entire confidence is based on being part of the majority crowd. Hence, for them, anyone who offers evidence against the crowd, that's enough for Muz and tsf to go into mob-mode.

I keep up to date by following Dr Peter McCullough's website:
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/archive?sort=new

Just a tip on seeing how the Mainstream Media handles this. I'll explain a tactic of litigation court lawyers. I'll make up a fictitious example ... in years past, for the sake of illustration, the Court decided on a case where a brothel was set up in the ground floor of a Primary School, and the Court said you cannot do it. In the future, the lawyers will argue what is the ratio decidenti vs the obiter dicta of that decision. The lawyers for one side will say that the ruling means you cannot have brothels in any educational facility (WIDE INTERPRETATION). Whereas the lawyers for the other side will argue to narrow it down to being forbidden to having brothels on ground floors of primary schools,  but that it is ok to have a brothel two shops away from a Secondary School (NARROW INTERPRETATION). ... as said, this is just a made-up fictitious illustration to explain the difference between ratio decidendi vs obiter dicta.

This is the difference between ratio vs obiter of a ruling, i.e. how far, beyond the original facts of the precedent, can a past ruling be stretched to cover wider principle in future situations.

Thus, if you see any Mainstream Media telling you that the Queensland ruling only applies to Queensland police and ambulance workers, they are fooling you. The fact is, the arguments will be over how wide the case applies. So no one knows how wide the Queensland ruling will be. It'll be debated by lawyers, for and against.

How's your list of sportsmen 'dropping like flies' going?

I said largely completely harmless.

so basically, pretty much harmless. 

have you ever wondered why it's largely the uneducated, god botherers or complete meth heads that are anti-vaxxers?

no Muz, it's changed, a timeline in 6 parts 

1: covid is a lie
2: it's real, but a disease made by the government for control
3: the vaccine kills 
4: everyone is having heart attacks
5: vaccine 'injuries'

and now we are at:

6: mandates were unlawful 

You make the error of thinking within the confines of what the Media tells you how to think. That list of 6 items is rote from the Mainstream Media's slander of conspiracy theorist.

The better way is to solely focus on what eminent doctors are saying, and which scientific journal articles they put forward as basis for what they are saying.

tsf, in so many ways, you are a Media-product how how a plain-vanilla non-thinking person discusses current topics. It's like you're a regurgitating tape recorder of what you skim from the headlines of Mainstream media.

Well.. eminent doctors tend to get put in the mainstream media, so....

If you think that, then you must either be a teenager, or someone that lives within the narrow confines of believing what you see/hear on the 6pm TV news, and nothing else.

To start the ball rolling, I explain -- since you're fairly simple -- that "corruption" is where people take money in order to do bad things.

Do a search for - medical publishing corruption.

Here's one to get your started. If you're a person immersed in Minecraft and kiddie games, and weekend football. And your only concept of the world is what you read on the news page that you're redirected to when you log out of email, imagine a world where most young people are like that. It is like that.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC558045/

But your link is actually saying it's the Medical Journals that are corrupt, not the mainstream media?

I mean.. I don't follow any news at all these days, just what comes from word of mouth, and things I see through work. Don't act like I haven't read these kinds of things already.

Here's something to get you started. If you're a person immersed in conspiracy theories and idiotic take. And weekend tokes. And your only concept of the world is that everyone is being poisoned and killed because that's what you read on a website once, imagine a world where that is your day job. It's like that.

You gullible young person. You want to know how easy it is for the Mainstream Media to control you? All it has to do is label something a "conspiracy theory" - and people like NicCarBel will instantly shut their minds off to that.

1) Do research on corruption in the medical industry, the medical publishing industry, and the pharmaceutical industry. In fact, do research on corruption on any area in society where there is tons of money in the billions.

Then find out how TV and Media is linked to promoting those things that will make the most money for massive corporations.

This world is going crazy, as everybody says. So how are you going to navigate the jungle?

My approach to navigating the jungle is:
- always go on facts and data.
- always insist on numerous sources for facts and data, in order to see a big picture.
- just because the crowd does something, does not mean it is truth (because the crowd is made up of people who follow the crowd, not the facts and data)
- keep records of information you receive, so that you can build a big picture for yourself
- if you see a person's first, instant reaction to new information is to mock and insult - don't let those people influence your life direction. Most people are mockers.
- there is a difference between having a university degree vs. having common sense wisdom

Seek the truth, and you will find Him.

Make the claims, and provide the evidence.
If you don't then it's just a theory.

And by evidence, not just something tenuously linked. If you say you have a list of sportsmen dropping like flies, provide it, rather than posting hour long YouTube videos.

You have to know what you're looking for, otherwise you won't see it - and then just dismiss it as "coincidence".

The government data of countries like UK, Europe, Australia, U.S. is showing a roughly 18% increase in deaths above historical norms. That does not mean 18% of the population die off.

Instead, it means that over the decades where death rate records have been kept, the number of people  - as a percentage of society - has always been fairly constant. But suddenly, there's been an 18% jump in people dying. And the crucial thing to note is, it wasn't just the older people dying ... it was younger people; which is highly unexpected. (See the numerous stories in the news about younger people dying with no explanation).

And because the 18% excess deaths has a preponderance of heart problems among young people, the ones who could be more susceptible is young sportspeople who put a lot of stress on their hearts due to sports.

So, for example, if, say, 100 footballers die around the world each year, then there's going to be an increase of 18 extra deaths, i.e. 118 deaths. That's the 100 per year norm, plus the 18 extra excess deaths.

The average bloke will dismiss that as no big deal, a coincidence, a conspiracy theory. But the ones who are really worried about these excess deaths are particularly the insurance companies, who pay financially when more people die. For that reason, it was insurance companies who were the first to detect this jump in excess deaths.

And of course, the Media and people like you put it down to the stress of Covid, lack of hospitals, mental health etc. But when you see the graphs, the jump in excess deaths occurred in sync with the month that the Covid vaccine rollouts started.

And you can go and put your head in the sand, and dismiss this as nonsense. But if there are any people out there who are driven by data and evidence - not by herd-mentality, review some of the videos by Dr. John Campbell. The university medial professors he interviews are no chumps.

So you can throw as much mud as me, it doesn't bother me - but be slow to insult the university medial professors that Dr John Campbell interviews.

https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/search?query=excess%20deaths

Sure.

You must I'm assuming so post the list.

Post. The. List.

But that's the thing. We know what we're looking for, the answer to the original questions. Makes The Nic wonder what you were like at school

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxP8sEwQdPg&t=89s

Something I read for work today:

"that just proves that the greatest risk of vaccines is knowing your local anti vaccer … cause everyone they know has adverse events …"

In today's sheep mentality, the phrase "follow the science" means  -- shut up and do not question the consensus.

Whereas, when I was receiving my education, "follow the science" means follow the facts and evidence, even if everyone says it is wrong.

NicCarBel, It sounds like you've been moulded in the sheep-mentality? If you just ridicule people because of labels - vaxer, antivaxer - then that's the trait of the mob. They don't look at facts and evidence. They just move as a mob to create a loud noise to drown out those citing facts and evidence.

Look at Pfizer's data, and search for the term "thrombosis" (medical word for "blood clot" - and note that it appears 105 times in Pfizer's document on side effects from the Covid vaccines.

https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

If you're a crowd-follower, you'll just jeer at me and label me an anti-vaxer.

Note that all the doctors, who are warning about the dangers of the Covid vaccines, for their entire careers were pro-vaccines. Suddenly, when they saw dangers with this new technology, the entire pharma and media system turned on them, labelling them as "anti-vax".

Can you not see through the thick cloud of darkness, and realise that a doctor - who has been pro-vax for decades, and even being chairman of FDA committees that approve of new vaccines - when that doctor sounds a warning of dangers of a new technology-vaccine, he is not anti-vax. In your Charlie-Brown cloud that shouds you, can you see the logic of what I've written in these two paragraph?

But some of them have skin the game.  Their lucrative careers are at stake. They have power to make others tow the line.

There were general practitioners administering steroids to patients with COVID pneumonia who were at risk of dying.  At the time there was no "evidence" to suport that even though its a basic 101 treatment protocol that in the post acute phase of viral infections, inflmmation is what does the damage and steroids help. They threatened with de-registration if they continued.  Its quite likely people died because of that. 

The eminent  cnuts came out in the ,media as hero's anouncing to the world that shock horror, steroids work, and it would save millions of lives, not including the ones they allowed to die.  Absolute cnuts.

I guess just 9,199,999 more to convince...

See, at least you talk sense.
Steroids do work for respiratory issues. I've seen it first hand back in 2018

@nic.
Yes of course, and all before Covid.

Here is the media release from the study:

https://www.recoverytrial.net/news/low-cost-dexamethasone-reduces-death-by-up-to-one-third-in-hospitalised-patients-with-severe-respiratory-complications-of-covid-19

They are sooo proud of themselves.  Fucking digusting.

"It shows the importance of doing high quality clinical trials and basing decisions on the results of those trials." 

Not to mention the money and prestige that comes with that for finding out what was likley going to true be anyway whilst millions of other who they denied treatment waiting for it, died.

Have you lived long enough to realise that having a university degree does not make a person wise. That extends to medical degrees. Being a doctor does not make that person a wise person. The fact is, most doctors just follow what their medical boards tell them with no research done by themselves.

A friend, whose partner is a doctor in Australia, told me that their partner is so busy with medical practice that they did not have time to research the Covid news, watch the (so-called conspiracy videos, etc etc). They just followed the TGA's directions. And you know that Australian doctors can lose their medical licences if they go against the TGA's directives. But my friend said, when the doctor-partner did take time to study all the data and information coming out, they turned their stance towards realising that the Covid vaccines are dangerous.

As another local doctor said to me, even if the doctors realise the Covid vaccines are dangerous, "what can they do"? The doctors cannot do anything because if they are reported as being against the Covid vaccines, they lose their jobs. Here are two videos of Australian doctors who chose to lose their jobs, rather than go along with the sham of the Covid vaccines being "safe and effective".

https://rumble.com/v15aan1-world-premiere-conference-of-conscience-australian-doctors-finally-speak-ou.html

https://rumble.com/v15rlnb-part-2-conference-of-conscience-australian-doctors-finally-speak-out.html

That was a year ago. Now in late 2023, Melbourne University, Queensland University and Flinders University researchers made a review of peer-reviewed data on the danger of Covid vaccines. (August 2023)

https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/11/8/2287

Sounds like every doctor is a different opinion then, so there’s no point trying to force anyone’s opinions on anyone else at all. And yes, that works both ways.

No one is trying to force an opinion. The aim of the exercise is to let people gain access to information, so that they can make an "informed decision" - rather than forcing them to follow a particular doctor's opinion, simply because that doctor happens to have gotten a job with the government. And forcing people to follow that government doctor's opinion, otherwise you'll lose your job. And forcing ALL Australian doctors to follow protocol for fear of losing their jobs.

I realise, on the other hand, that there have to be some regulation and boundaries.