Too Big for LinkedIn. Where’s the Legality?

I tried to make post with the Human Rights Lawyer on LinedIn who seems to be handling single handedly the whole of Australia’s democratically principled response to the current insanity.

But it seems there’s a character limit on posts there and my post exceeded it.  So here it is an I’ll link to it there (if that’s allowed).

The Pfizer vaccine claims absolute benefit of 99.96% as we all know by now, or should,  as against a ‘natural’ benefit of 99.86%.  i.e. it proposed a 0.1% improvement on your chances.

So starting from there we can take a look at what is going on:


99.86 % proof means 9986 survive from 10,000. 14 die.

99.96 % proof means 9996 survive from 10,000 4 die.

So 10 people needed it. But 10,000 were given it.

10 people needed it in the presence of:

forcible lockdowns forbidden light, sun, space, exercise.

forbidden interaction with friends and family.

forbidden available treatments.

forbidden true information about real nature/dimensions of threat.

forbidden freedom of speech.

forbidden meetings and protests.

forbidden even to post on facebook about meetings and protests.

forbidden for a doctor even to prescribe according to his own ethics/training/experience/belief.

forbidden true information about available immune enhancement measures.

total absence of any mention whatever of immune system importance even.

official programme to accelerate and emphasise doubt, fear, uncertainty, worry and panic.

and more.

In the presence of all that 10 people needed it.

so a nation was crippled.

all democratic rights, freedoms, principles were abrogated.

all normal medical care of the populace was jeopardised at as yet unmeasured cost.

emergency was declared in the absence of any demonstrated emergency.

people’s money was/is squandered on an unprecedented scale.

un – time tested injections were mandated for people.

even for children.

education was suspended.

illogicality and evidence-less postulates were made the norm.

And that’s just the beginning of an overlook of it all.

And in all that there’s no clear criminality, overstepping of bounds, dereliction of duty, failure to perform, misbehaviour, malpractice in high office, bureaucratic incompetence?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *