News Ltd targets MP Jason Woodforth…again

News Ltd’s Sunday Mail produces another hit piece targeting local Brisbane MP for Nudgee and his stance on water fluoridation

By General Maddox.
In what can only be described as a poor attempt for a hit-piece, the Sunday Mail has again lashed out at Jason Woodforth, MP for the Brisbane electorate of Nudgee. On page 21 of the Sunday July 7th 2013 issue the headline read, Newman MP in sex-guru rant. Sounds sensationalised from the get-go and was clearly intended to leave the reader thinking that this particular MP is off busy with some new age weirdo making YouTube videos that are apparently seen by no one. “I couldn’t believe it. It was just so ridiculous” said Jason upon seeing the article. “I will be contacting the paper. I have the right of reply”.

Most MP’s in one way or another like to make an appearance in the community and discuss topics they deem relevant. Mr Woodforth is no different. He first met Sam Bachman about a year ago at a health & nutrition event and have kept in touch since. There is nothing sinister or saucy for that matter going on here. The Sunday Mail on the other hand would like to convince you otherwise.

They’re keen to point out just whom the interviewer is and the types of videos she makes for her YouTube channel. The content of which is roughly 99% about living a healthy nutritious lifestyle and less than 1% anything to do with being a sex-guru.

Then, after the author labeled him “controversial”, Jason was surprised to read that one of his crucial quotes regarding water fluoridation was actually printed. “When journalist Jason Tin interviewed me for this story, I kept hitting him with the facts. I was surprised it made in the paper”, said Mr Woodforth. It is indeed true what he said. The “Fluoride” added to our water is a class S6 & S7 poison. Its a highly toxic substance.

This story has the potential to actually backfire on its original agenda. There’s a good chance people will go on to do their own research into water fluoridation after reading it. I also guarantee you that any person who stands alongside Mr Woodforth on water fluoridation certainly won’t be crossing over to the other side of the fence after reading it.

For those of you out there who don’t know Jason, from his photo in the article (seen below) you can see he used to compete in body building competitions and is deftly keen on living a healthy lifestyle and promoting good health to his constituents. Just think about how many politicians you see in the media and their ever expanding waistlines. Mr Woodforth however is in great shape and good health.

So, why not appear on a YouTube channel to promote good health practices?

Oh, right. Sorry. You thought water fluoridation was a good thing. See here for 50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation.

As for News Ltd., MP Jason Woodforth agrees, it’s abundantly clear where they stand on the issue. “They have a pro-fluoride agenda and obvious goal to manipulate public opinion about anyone that vocally opposes it”.


Tags: , , ,

Categories: Australian-news, Health

Author:General Maddox

Real News Australia was founded in 2012 and is Australia's leading alternative news site featuring; open source journalism, current news articles that actually matter, opinionated editorials, shared news items from Australia and around the world, documentary films & video clips. We are dedicated to talking about real issues, health news, world events, political events and deciphering the main stream media garbage in order to break the cycle of propaganda. Remember: "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell. Please share anything you feel is worth sharing and subscribe to our emails. This operation is run on a shoestring budget so any contributions are well received.


Subscribe to our RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

8 Comments on “News Ltd targets MP Jason Woodforth…again”

  1. July 9, 2013 at 10:24 pm #

    Well done guys. Good write up.

    Today’s media is a national disgrace, especially on the fluoridation issue; however, it wasn’t always this bad. For example, look how well the ABC handled the issue in 1993:

    Unfortunately, it has all gone to the dogs lately:

  2. Sonja Hardy
    July 9, 2013 at 10:33 pm #

    It’s no wonder newspapers are struggling to remain viable. Thank goodness most people can see through this gutter trash journalism – and hopefully you’re right, General, that this will backfire, and lead people to research fluoridation for themselves.

  3. July 9, 2013 at 10:46 pm #

    Finally the Truth is becoming mainstream — but NOT through the gutter trash garbage called ‘the media’ which RARELY reports the real truth. Time people woke up and did their own research on this issue. It’s NOT ‘fringe’ Science…. this is seriously digraceful considering Australia is in the last 3% of the world that still force this barbaric and archic measure on its entire population. Start with reading ‘The Case Against Fluoride’ by Connett, Mickelme and Beck

  4. July 10, 2013 at 7:28 pm #

    Good on you as usual General – putting the mainstream media puppets and their string pullers to shame.
    Warm Regards, Diane

  5. July 10, 2013 at 7:29 pm #

    Another important document your readers will be most interested in:-

    Presentation to the SPC for Utilities and the Environment City of Calgary Council Chambers
    Wednesday January 26, 2011
    Submitted by: Dr. James Beck, MD, Ph.D.
    Some of you on the committee have heard me before on fluoridation. I have in the past focused on the questions of effectiveness in preventing cavities and on the adverse effects of fluoride and of hexafluorosalicic acid. I have given reasons, based on peer-reviewed research papers published in credible journals, for concluding that fluoridation is at best minimally effective and definitely harmful to subgroups of the population and possibly harmful to all of us. So in these few minutes I will comment only on the ethical issue.
    In 1957 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that fluoridation is “compulsory preventive medication”. The court’s ruling is significant because it legitimizes the common-sense conclusion that we are being medicated and it puts the matter clearly in the realm of medical ethics. Medical ethics in turn is embedded in human rights.
    Here is how fluoridation violates the code of medical ethics. It is administration of a drug without control of dosage (controlling concentration in our water is not controlling dose or dosage). It is administration of a drug without informed consent of the recipient. It does not provide monitoring of the effects on the recipient. It is not possible for the recipient to stop receiving the drug (many can not get nonfluoridated water and none of us can avoid exposure from foods and drinks processed where tap water is fluoridated). The drug has not been shown to be safe for human consumption.
    Fluoridation of a public water supply is not only an ethical offense against us all, it is clearly a more serious offense against those subgroups of our population which are particularly at risk of harm from fluoride. These groups include infants being fed with formula reconstituted with tap water, diabetics, persons deficient in iodine intake, persons with kidney disease, boys during the eight-year-old’s growth spurt, and others. It is an obligation of city councils and of Alberta Health Services to protect all, not just the average or just the majority.
    Several councilors have rightly been concerned about the dental health of children of low-income families. It is said that fluoridation is of particular benefit to poor children. That has been investigated. It is found that the fluoridated poor groups have no better cavity experience than do the nonfluoridated poor groups. Furthermore, it is found that the prevalence of cavities increases as family income decreases. It’s not fluoride that would benefit poor children; it’s a higher standard of living, probably better diet and better oral hygiene.
    Now what kind of ethical consciousness allows one to continue to apply a possibly harmful process to unwilling people until there is absolute proof that it is harmful? I have seen this backward approach to safety in government reports on fluoridation. It goes like this: this study that shows association of fluoridation with this harmful effect is not a perfect study; there are weaknesses; therefore we will continue the process until it is shown with certainty that it is harmful. And no further research is recommended; no responsibility to support a better study is accepted. In the presence of a small and dubious benefit such a conclusion, more than being irresponsible, is outlandish.
    You don’t have the moral right to do this to us, to one million people. You should stop it now.
    James S. Beck, M.D., Ph.D.

    Professor Emeritus of Medical Biophysics, University of Calgary

  6. Pat Wheeldon
    July 10, 2013 at 8:18 pm #

    ridiculous nonsense puppet media … as usual … what can you expect when they make all their money from the sacred cow … “government advertising” … money talks .. big time!

  7. September 28, 2013 at 3:11 pm #

    Brief overview of water fluoridation_pollution 11 September, 2013. Diane Drayton Buckland

    Click to access brief-overview-of-water-fluoridation_pollution-11-september-2013-diane-drayton-buckland.pdf

    Let us clarify something regarding FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK (Professor Paul Connett) website – FAN seeks to broaden awareness about the toxicity of fluoride compounds among citizens, scientists, and policymakers alike. FAN not only provides comprehensive and up-to-date information, but remains vigilant in monitoring government agency actions that impact the public’s exposure to fluoride.

    I am sure many will be disturbed by the actions of the ADA and when this first happened some years ago, it certainly was disturbing to all Truth Seekers; the lengths to which some pro-fluoride fanatics go, in this case, please note that after Fluoride Action Network and the dot org domain was originally secured ( ) and before Fluoride Action Network could secure the domain name – that the American Dental Association (allegedly) deviously many say, swooped in and ‘nicked’ the domain name of Fluoride Action Network’s

    So to re-clarify this ‘interesting’ piece of pro-fluoride ‘manoeuvering’ by the ADA:-

    Fluoride Action Network Professor Paul Connett

    American Dental Association (who allegedly) ‘nicked’ the dot com

    I guess that’s a pretty effective way to impede people and researchers getting truth !

%d bloggers like this: