top of page

NSW Teachers Unite against mandatory vaccination

A large group of teachers and on-site school staff are pushing back against mandatory covid-19 vaccination.

The group, Australian Educators United, is being represented by Human Rights Advocates and Advocate Me: in an open letter to the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning; the group provides the reasons for their objection to the vaccine and demands the decision to mandate be reversed immediately.

The letter states that the group’s signatories are overwhelmingly composed of school staff including Principals, Assistant Principals, executive staff, teachers, administration staff, counsellors, school learning support officers and maintenance staff; and it claims they have been subjected to discriminatory treatment and their right to informed consent has been removed.

The World Health Organization 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 COVID19 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 COVID19 injections do not contain any of the killed or weakened Coronavirus 2019 (the causal agent) so this intervention does not meet the criteria to be called a 'vaccine'.

Referencing government data from the Therapeutic Goods Administration, the group points out the high number of reported vaccine injuries (>55,000) and deaths (495) in six months and goes on to say that trials were not conducted on the new untested genetic technology used in the injections; the pharmaceutical companies 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 intervention in the human body."

In light of the mounting evidence of poor safety and efficacy, the letter states "the Education Department’s COVID-19 mandatory drug policy a CLINICAL EXPERIMENT PERFORMED ON ONSITE SCHOOL STAFF that is in violation of all medical ethics!"

Due to the provisional approval of these injections, it is unlawful for them to be mandated for NSW onsite school staff, referencing Article 6, Sections 1 and 3 of the Nuremburg Code and Section 2.1.3 'Valid Consent' in the Australian Government's Immunisation Handbook.

This detailed seven-page letter provides very clear reasons for conscientious objection to forced vaccination, backed up by quality reference data, but the underlying message is that forced medication of any kind is morally and ethically bankrupt. The Department of Education and any governing body has no right to interfere with the sacred doctor-patient relationship and informed consent must be practiced.

The letter is pointed in its assurance that the group is prepared to escalate their grievances to pursue legal recourse, should the decision not be reversed. And judging by the 68,000+ signatures on their petition, one can only surmise that inaction from the Education Department, will result in significant interruption to learning in this country, as more supporters from all States and Territories join each day.

To read the letter and support their campaign, visit their site by clicking here.

3,322 views2 comments

Recent Posts

See All

2 comentarios

Yeah - it is all in the definition

Really keen to get peoples understanding of the new definition for "vaccine" on the CDC website. This has only just changed.

The new definition is

"A preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases."

Out TGA hasn't changed their definition yet, but I hope for one time we actually follow the lead from USA here and they do change it to be the same.

This is my thought process here - I think this definition change has a major impact on how we view vaccinations. The definition NO LONGER mentions "PROTECTION" from the disease. (they have had to take that out of the definition because science now…

Me gusta

where is the WHO reference for this statement

"The World Health Organization 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. "

Me gusta
bottom of page