Info message
Successful operation message
Warning message
Error message
 

Added by Sue Grey on 2021-10-11 12:07

09 September 2021


Dear NSW Hon. Sarah Mitchell

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning


Human Rights Advocates and Advocate Me, have been approached by many aggrieved and concerned Department of Education employees (along with parents and students) in New South Wales (N.S.W), with regards to the discriminatory treatment they are experiencing, for exercising their right of informed consent to not take the COVID-19 injection.

It has been brought to our attention, that all NSW on-site school staff are being exposed to egregious conduct for exercising their right to decline the COVID-19 injection.


For the purposes of this letter, and for the purposes of protecting the identity of on-site school staff, we will not be disclosing the respective names of the aggrieved employees and members of the school community. It is sufficient for you to be aware, that this is a significant population of over 5000 individuals, employees including Principals, Assistant Principals, executive staff, teachers, administration staff, counsellors, school learning support officers and maintenance staff.

We note that the COVID-19 medical intervention mandates from the NSW Government, do not include private primary care providers such as General Practitioners and Allied Health Professionals when ‘common sense’ would indicate that they are a profession most exposed to COVID-19 in clinical situations.

The NSW Education Department must provide a definitive and conclusive, explanation, supported by independent peer-reviewed scientific studies, as to why it is proposed to become mandatory for NSW on-site school employees to be injected with a drug, but is NOT mandatory for private General Practitioners and Allied Health Professionals.

Currently there is no mandatory COVID-19 injection applicable to public, private, or educational facility staff in other states or territories of Australia. We assert that even if they did, the employees would still have the right to decline the COVID-19 injection. However, at this stage, there have been no official mandates to force


1 | P a g e

comparable interstate employees to take the COVID-19 injection. The measurement validity underpinning the rationale is evidently unreliable and without credible qualification.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) states that a drug is called a 'vaccine' if it protects people before they come into contact with the disease, and if it prevents the transmission of the disease in the community. Yet this COVID-19 injection will not do these things. The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administrator (TGA), states that this medical intervention will not prevent you getting the disease, nor will it prevent transmission of the disease in the community.

Further, the WHO definition states, “because vaccines contain only killed or weakened forms of germs, viruses and bacteria, they do not cause the disease or put you at risk of its complications .” Yet, the COVID-19 injections do not contain any of the killed or weakened Coronavirus 2019 (the causal agent); as such, it is questionable as to whether this intervention meets the criteria to be called a 'vaccine' at all.

In the very short time that this medical intervention has been trialled in the human population (December 2020 - September 2021), there has been overwhelming evidence of the complications and deaths caused after the injection and no definitive proof of benefit because COVID-19 injected people are still getting COVID-19, and even dying from/with this illness.

The COVID-19 injection contains genetic technology that has been previously tested on cancers but has not been extensively tested on infectious disease. The injection does not directly contain the synthetic spike protein but rather codifies or sends into the body, information capsules for the making of this spike protein by the human body. In two of the presently used 'injected drugs'; this is delivered by an mRNA molecule (nucleic acid) that may have the potential to insert into (marry with) our own DNA. The effects of this on the genetic blueprint of humans, and the long-term adverse health outcomes, will not be known until the next generation.

Pharmaceutical companies have stated that they have NOT done trials that have investigated the effects of this medical intervention on the reproductive organs, or on the carcinogenicity or toxicology, of this injected drug in the human body. This makes the NSW Education Department’s COVID-19 mandatory injection policy, a CLINICAL EXPERIMENT PERFORMED ON ON-SITE SCHOOL STAFF, that is in violation of all medical ethics! All governing education bodies will be complicit in any adverse events or death to employees.

Furthermore, as of August 29, 2021, the official TGA COVID-19 adverse events report records 55,016 adverse vaccine reports, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), anaphylaxis reactions, myocarditis and pericarditis.

The following quote is from the TGA report (29/8/2021): “Sadly, two people died this week – a 59-year-old woman from Queensland with confirmed TTS and a 54-year-old man from NSW with probable TTS. The TGA extends its sincerest condolences to her family and loved ones”.


2 | P a g e

It is noted on the Therapeutic Goods Administrator website (https://www.tga.gov.au/apm-summary/comirnaty) that the Pfizer vaccine is categorised in the ‘Black Triangle Scheme’, meaning it’s a provisionally registered product and this medicine will remain in the Black Triangle Scheme for the duration of its provisional registration. Being ‘provisional’ means the following:


  • Pfizer vaccine is still in clinical trials.

  • Remains experimental.

  • No established risk/benefits analysis.

  • No medium/long term effects have been established.

  • No proven benefits, however; there is overwhelming evidence of adverse events and death.


As a result of the vaccine being in the Black Triangle Scheme, it is unlawful for the injection to be mandated on NSW on-site school/education staff.

It is noted that the respective NSW Educational governing bodies, have access to this conclusive government data recording, as such, will be held accountable for mandating a medical intervention resulting in adverse events to employees who are coerced into taking the COVID-19 injection. Further noting, that adverse events may not always be evident from the outset of the injection, and may become more apparent after the 2nd, 3rd, 4th dose. No long-term studies exist; the long-term effects are unknown.

Furthermore, a ‘health’ policy that promotes an invasive medical procedure, must be proven to promote ‘health’ before it is mandated in healthy people. The government policy of a mandatory medical intervention for NSW on-site school staff, has not been proven to promote ‘health’, and due to the low risk from COVID-19 disease for all healthy people; the Education Department MUST provide independent peer-reviewed scientific studies supporting their policy of mandatory COVID-19 injections, in promoting the ‘health’ of their employees.

Consequently, there have not been any clinical trials in humans to establish an evidence-based risk/benefit analysis. There is no proven benefit for taking this medical intervention. Valid risk/benefit analysis requires a minimum of ten years of data, to establish whether there are benefits that override the overwhelming risks of this COVID-19 injection, which are being observed globally by government regulators, including the Australian TGA (>495 COVID-19 vaccine deaths and >55,000 vaccine injuries in just six months).

These adverse health outcomes and deaths are acknowledged by governments globally to represent only 1-10% of the actual adverse health outcomes because of the voluntary reporting systems that are used by governments and, also, due to the latent effect of months or years for adverse events to develop in the recipients.

For example, thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, myocarditis and pericarditis, are known adverse health outcomes after these medical interventions and listed on the package inserts for all vaccines, including the 3 | P a g e


COVID-19 injection. It is noted on the “Australian Government Department of Health” website that


Vaccination for COVID-19 is voluntary – as are all vaccinations in Australia – and people maintain

the option to choose.”

Medical freedom is an inalienable right afforded to all on-site school staff, and the policy of mandatory injections is contrary to such law, as demonstrated in the following points:


  • Forced, coerced, and mandated medical interventions are in violation of the Nuremberg Code principles. Article 6, Section 1 states: “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be expressed and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice”.


Article 6, Section 3 states: “In no case should a collective community agreement, or the consent of a community leader or other authority, substitute for an individual’s informed consent”.


  • In the Australian Government’s Immunisation Handbook, under Section 2.1.3 ‘Valid Consent’, it states that for consent to be legally valid, “it must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation.”


Mandatory medical interventions are a breach of basic human rights and medical freedoms. We all should have the right to go about our everyday life without being forced or coerced into being injected with a drug, especially an experimental one using new technology.


The decision should be made by each individual on their own, privately, or in consultation with their medical doctor or health care practitioner. Everyone’s body is different and existing medical conditions, predispositions, and other medical history must be considered.

We note with great concern, the potential conflict of interest that may occur, in both your role as Education Minister and as the governing body of schools and education, relating to the Human Rights protecting every citizen, as you are undeniably responsible for overseeing the Covid-19 drug rollout. This has given rise to an unacceptable discriminatory culture throughout the N.S.W Education Department staff; that we at Human Rights Advocates and Advocate Me, simply will not condone or endorse.

This ‘culture’, has given rise to the following behaviours that are of serious concern:


  • N.S.W education department staff are being pressured to identify their vaccination status, despite this running counter to very clear privacy laws.


  • Unvaccinated employees are being branded and harassed; their suffering discrimination, victimisation and bullying a result of the proposed mandates to be implemented by the NSW Education Department under your directive.


Fostering the behaviour to bully, shame, and intimidate on-site school staff for being informed, is not


4 | P a g e

acceptable workplace practice. This discriminatory behaviour cannot be attributed to any safety concerns, given the fact that many studies have now confirmed that both injected and not injected individuals are likely to spread the delta variant.

  • These employees are being forced to share their medical status with the principal who is not a medical practitioner and who cannot guarantee the securitization of such personal documentation. This is not only a serious breach of privacy, but supports the outlandish assumptions, that unvaccinated people must be punished and exposed.

  • We have also been recently informed, that this targeting is leading to a proposal which would be subject to your endorsement; that all unvaccinated staff will be coerced into taking leave. Again, this is beyond the boundaries of your authority.

  • We have been informed that education department members have until October 25th to -undertake their first ‘injection’, after which they need to endure a second dose of the experimental drug. It is without question, that such a proposal is nothing short of a Gestapo-like action, designed to inflict pain, trauma, shaming and gaslighting on non-injected humans and certainly does not accord with the medical standard of informed consent and protection for choices in medical decisions.

  • All citizens have the right to engage in informed consent and there are many risks associated with taking the COVID-19 injection, including but not limited to: increased risk of blood clotting with the AstraZeneca injection, and increased risk of heart inflammation with the Pfizer injection.

  • The seeming ignorance to, or censorship of; valid, independent, scientific data, runs counter to the obligation schools have to provide information that is (rigorously tested) and evidence-based.

Your omission of the overwhelming bodies of scientific data, overlooks your duty of care to employees and the children under their protection.


The attached data and studies, will ensure that you cannot plausibly deny knowledge of the scientific findings, statistics of mortality and other adverse effects, or circumnavigation of constitutional law regarding this ‘rollout’.


You are reminded, that even though you might be the executive departmental staff; you are still only a public servant and not a qualified medical practitioner. You do not have the right to segregate education staff in the knowledge that the science does not substantiate such a decision; nor do you have the right to instil fear in education department employees, whom are now unsure of what roles and duties they will be permitted to perform as trained and qualified individuals.

For your education, we provide the enclosed COVID-19 declination form, which very clearly articulates the logical considerations as to why these educated departmental staff, have chosen not to expose themselves to the possibility of serious adverse reactions that are now widely and well documented. For your additional benefit, the form also refers to laws, regulations and policies that protect the rights to informed consent in


5 | P a g e

receiving an injection or any other medical procedure.


As school executive, we suggest that you become informed about the following:


We have attached, for your education, a recent interview conducted by People for Safe Vaccines, with a member of the community who had recently lost her sister, to a horrible death after vaccination, from blood clotting.

We suggest that you, as the employer who will be held responsible for harm or death; educate yourself about these risks, before committing criminal negligence and persecuting staff who have educated themselves on these risks.

Human Rights Advocates and Advocate Me immediately request a meeting with school governing bodies, along with our top medical experts, to educate you on the importance of informed consent and the risks associated with these COVID-19 injections.


As outlined above, we have enclosed examples of two preprint studies that clearly show that the COVID-19 medical intervention, does not reduce transmission of the delta variants, and that the injection programs, generate immune escape variants.

Leading scientist Dr Geert Vanden Bossche stated that; “Mass injections in the middle of a pandemic is prone to promoting selection and adaptation of immune escape variants, that are featured by increasing infectiousness and resistance to spike protein (S)-directed antibodies (Abs), thereby diminishing protection in vaccines and threatening the unvaccinated”. We have enclosed his statement herein:

https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/post/c-19-pandemia-quo-vadis-homo-sapiens.


As a collective, please be assured, that we have very clear intentions to escalate education staff grievances to pursue legal recourse, should this egregious mandating of COVID-19 injection of on-site school staff, not be reversed immediately. Please note, that a Legal Firm has been engaged and is preparing for escalation of this matter to court proceedings.

We trust that this information will avert any further escalation of these issues and create an immediate resolution for all on-sight school staff concerned.


If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact Ms Sonya Nicolaci via her email address.


6 | P a g e

Yours faithfully,



HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATES ADVOCATE ME









Sonya Nicolaci

Serene Teffaha


CEO

CEO


Human Rights Advocates

Advocate Me


e: info@humanrightsadvocates.com.au

e: serene.teffaha@advocateme.com.au


Copied to:-



Webform@mitchell.minister.nsw.gov.au

.........










Daniel Suter Daniel Suter wrote. For Denmark it was beating pots and pans outside parliament for 10 days.

For New Zealand, can we do it with emails?

Yes we can, keep em coming.


Total Votes: Agree:0 Disagree:0 Ratio:0% Agree.


answers.

Site views 456201.
Page hits 353.

Built By Antidote Solutions © 2021