Featured Image

U.S. citizens: Demand Congress investigate soaring excess death rates

(LifeSiteNews) — The Australian federal government has bowed to pressure to honor its campaign promise to have a Royal Commission into the country’s response to COVID-19. Previously, the Anthony Albanese government had proposed instead having an inquiry headed by three “experts.” This would not even have included an examination of the actions of the states and territories, which were responsible for the health policies, including lockdowns, vaccine mandates and wearing masks.

A Royal Commission is regarded by critics of the governments’ actions as perhaps the last chance to correct past wrongs and restore accountability. “We have experienced what could be deemed the greatest breach of medical ethics, human rights, and free speech this country has ever witnessed,” says Kara Thomas, secretary of the Australian Medical Professionals Society.

“The harm to Australian people, psychologically, physically, socially and economically from the government overreach is likely incalculable and the consequences may be felt for generations to come. The undermining of public trust may be irreparable at least in my lifetime without a truly independent Royal Commission that transparently examines the mistakes and ensures accountability and just compensation.”

Senator Malcolm Roberts from the One Nation Party says a senate inquiry to draft the terms of reference for a Royal Commission registered “universal support” for the initiative. “Nearly four years on from the start of COVID-19 Australians still don’t have answers about why government took some of the most draconian measures in Australian history.”

“[Prime Minister] Anthony Albanese’s COVID review panel is made up of insiders who vocally supported the harshest lockdowns in the world. It’s a toothless tiger made to whitewash everything the federal government did while turning a blind eye to anything state governments did.”

There are many questions for Australian governments to answer. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2020 and 2021 saw the lowest level of deaths from respiratory diseases since records have been kept. So where was the pandemic? And why, given the low level of observable risk – the intensive care units remained empty throughout 2020 and 2021 – did Australia have some of the longest lockdowns in the world, Victoria’s being the world’s longest?

Mass vaccinations were forced on the population in 2021, purportedly to protect the population against the virus. The outcome was the opposite. According to the ABS the number of deaths in 2022 from COVID rose ninefold. Why did the vaccines not have the effect they were supposed to?

Another issue is the disturbing rise in all-cause mortality that coincides with the mass vaccination. According to the OECD excess deaths in Australia in the first 34 weeks of 2023 were 16.8 per cent above trend.

An even more obvious failure was telling citizens that the vaccines were “safe and effective” after less than a year of their testing and introduction. In that time period it was impossible to know the medium- or long-term effects, so how could they be deemed safe?

READ: South Australian court rules employers who mandated COVID jabs can be held liable for injuries

If a judge is to investigate the problems effectively, it will be necessary to expose unfalsifiable arguments: claims that cannot be proven wrong so therefore cannot be true. Such arguments are the antithesis of science, yet they have been used repeatedly by Australian health authorities when justifying their policies.

For instance, if shown there is no evidence of an actual pandemic, the response as: “Great. That proves we were effective.” If shown there was a large rise of COVID deaths after the vaccinations that were supposed to protect us, the response was: “It would have been far worse if we hadn’t forced people to be vaccinated.” If confronted with the startling rise in all-cause mortality after the vaccinations, a rate comparable to what happens in war time, the riposte was: “How do you know what caused it? Correlation is not causation.”

As regards the obvious fact that the medium- or long-term consequences of a treatment cannot be known in the short term, so saying the vaccines were safe and effective was dishonest, the likely response would be that the authorities were “under pressure” and they did the best they could in the circumstances. This is irrelevant.

To counter such obfuscation, a key question from the judge should be: “Can you envisage evidence that would show you got something wrong?” If there is no response, then the claims are unfalsifiable.

Most of the submissions tend to address marginal issues and imply that, while governments might have made mistakes that could be learned from, overall the right thing was done.

There were exceptions, though. The submission by Coverse, a national peak body representing Australians who have been hurt by the COVID-19 vaccines, noted that Australia is “one of the worst places in the Western world in which to experience an adverse reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine — there was zero infrastructure set up to help Australians if anything went wrong (despite no long term data on provisionally approved products).”

The United Australia Party’s (UAP’s) submission provided a damning list of problems and failures, including censorship of anyone questioning government actions, the role of the World Health Organisation, excess deaths, the questionable actions of the Therapeutic Goods Administration, especially in banning Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, and the granting of legal indemnity to pharmaceutical companies. The UAP also asked why “were the COVID vaccines ever approved when Pfizer’s own trial found more deaths in the vaccinated group compared to the placebo group.”

Roberts said: “Only a Royal Commission can answer why government had vaccine mandates for a vaccine that didn’t stop transmission, secret health advice that was never published, established plans for pandemic response that were ignored and [enforced] the longest lockdowns in the world over a virus as severe as some flus.”

U.S. citizens: Demand Congress investigate soaring excess death rates