Susan Carew (Holmes) Public Declares No Consent to Data Gathering and Selling Data by Corrupt Actors

I, Susan Carew (Holmes) do not consent to any data gathering of my data without my permission. I request my privacy under the Australian Privacy Act 1988.

I consider this practice not safe and intrusive on my privacy. I value my privacy and it is what keeps me safe from interests using data to change behaviour, smear people, stalk people or harm them. Moreover, data can be changed in a digital environment and used to weaponise the information to smear a person so others will attack them.

I do not consent to an unlawful surveillance state apparatus arising around us which is intruding on our privacy. This has not been debated by the public or agreed to. The media is not publishing information in the public interest but is controlled by powerful interests spinning information to create tensions, powerlessness and unhappiness. These practices are clearly coming from foreign actors as an intervention into our way of life that is not in the public interest or ensuring safety.

This published document of ‘no consent to data gathering’ has been in response to Facebook (who I don’t use) sending me a notification of a person I contacted (cc’d) recently in a private email to assist a person in real need. My email is private and is generated from my website worldpeacefull. It is not gmail (Silicon Valley, CIA). The notification shocked me and made clear to me that all my data has been gathered and sold to Facebook and other players. This is a massive breach of my privacy.

AI and automation is scooping up the data, then matching notifications to influence me to go onto Facebook to communicate with people. I never asked for this. It reminds me of when years ago Linkedin did this with a person I was in dispute with to entice contact. The issues were sexual harassment and stalking. I have concerns of a digital world that has zero ethics as those in ‘the game’ are motivated by monied interests and the promise of control in this emerging Smart Technocracy. This is not a world I believe in nor will participate in as I believe it works against our humanity and destroys real community and the potential for a peaceful world built on respect, kindness and privacy.

The analogy of email breaches is exactly the same as someone coming to your letterbox and opening your mail. They photocopy it and send it to others. I have further concerns about a privatised Australia Post scanning mail to identify contents. What this is amounting to as ‘no privacy for the public’ as contrasted by those in power attaining maximum protection by interests breaking the law.

Truth matters as does integrity as it creates trust and a believe that governance is operating with taxpayers money for the highest interests of the people. This is what keeps people safe.

We the people call for a Anti-Corruption Commission as we want the corruption and nepotism to stop as it undermines our democracy, collapses the tax base and allows foreign interests to take over our country under the guise of a public interest or safety.

Is Australia a target for organised crime? The migrants brought in at this time were identified as exploited. In fact the Facebook data taken from my email was an email where an exploited Nepali person told me of his situation on low income and exploitation in the Middle East. He is extremely poor and trying to feed his daughter. I was including the Yogi in the email as he helps vulnerable people.

On the other side of this issue, why were half a million migrants allowed into Australia using Covid-19 by the current Albanese government when people are unemployed. I was told recently that a young woman was offered $14 per hour gross. She had no rights and it appears the basic wage is being removed to enable an agile economy where people have to vie for job on digital platforms with no rights or loadings. I was paid $20 per hour in the 1980’s. On Centrelink, as a former market analyst I was offered $20 per hour. I was amazed at the exploitation and removal of rights for fair pay. It is becoming evident that we have been kept in positions of poverty, particularly those not in the professional classes. The government dismantled the Arbitration Commisson (National Wage Case setting fair wages) and unions are being compromised thus weakening worker’s abilities to ask for fair work and rights. According to the Fair Work Commission the basic wage is $23.23 which is still appalling given wages were docked overtime due fallacious reasons e.g. the Accord Mark I and II process under Bob Hawke to hold wages down. We had the superannuation argument where wages were garnished to replace pensions arguing an aging workforce. This was not true. And now the continuence of low wage settings which never kept pace with inflation. The Fair Work Commission has an ABN ABN 93 614 579 199 which means trades. This is unlawful under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution whereby no corporations are allowed. It is identified as a Commonwealth Government Statutory Authority and I ask – is it true? Who is on the Board?

These are just a few issues emerging from initial allegations in Parliament of organised crime.

The article link below discusses ‘misinformation’ laws. Is this why Peter Dutton supports ‘misinformation laws’ to ensure control of information like a totalitarian state rather than a democracy? The article below appears to target social media companies and raises issues of stabbings blaming social media which is where the public communicate and are exposed to private corporations generating ‘information’. Are the real targets independent experts or public opinion questioning the dominant narrative and having their information censored? There are differences between misinformation and disinformation which is important to understand as many can get issues wrong but just have an opinion. They are being stirred by information to get angry and then we hear ‘trigger alerts’ as if emotions should be nullified. This is what the Electoral Integrity Taskforce:

Misinformation is false information that is spread due to ignorance, or by error or mistake, without the intent to deceive.
Disinformation is knowingly
false information designed to deliberately mislead and influence public opinion or obscure the truth for malicious or deceptive purposes.

Why is the focus on misinformation and not disinformation in laws? This looks like the targeting of the public and shutting down of freedom of speech and raises again the issue of potentially corrupt people covering up unlawful behaviour by shutting down those critiquing them. This creates a scenario where they are ‘above the law’. No-one should be above the law as we have to be sure that the Separation Of Powers doctrine in the Westminster system and that the Judiciary, Executive and Parliament are offices in integrity and not being used to shutdown our democracy and bankrupt our government treasury with impunity.

Courts that are not corrupt should be handling cases of deliberate disinformation so that the public can be clear what is true and what is not. Otherwise information gets weaponised to target innocent people or those taking risks to bring information out in the ‘public interest’ as whistleblowers. The real question is – how deep does this rabbit hole go?

This article I found raises real concerns and begs the question of how a Chinese billionnaire Huang Xiangmo reportedly paying tens of thousands of dollars to former Liberal minister Santo Santoro while mounting a back-room campaign to secure Australian citizenship, ASIO apparently intervened. How many foreigners who have considerable power and influence globally are able to buy up Australian assets, land and garner influence over publicly elected officials? To what extent can a foreign power send in troops to protect assets? The real issue is foreigners owning Australia calling this ‘stakes in the game’. Are we the United Stakes of Australia where those powerful brokers coordinate with a shared goal of the Global Reset?

So, do I become targeted because in my integrity say no to corruption and unlawful gathering of my data by foreign actors? I was identified by AI at the Federal Parliament Security in 2022 and refused entry on the basis of not showing my ID. I was going to the first Question Time of the Albanese Government and never take my bag as you have to check it in. They refused entry to a person who is a national of the country who the parliament are supposed to represent. I do not need to show ID. They even told the police to not let me in my own parliament. I wrote to Katy Galligher (Finance Minister thinking she was the Attorney General) complaining about Wilsons security refusing me entry. I am told to write to them. The next day I returned with a Statutory Declaration of my ID and was directed to the Australian Federal Police. They took a photo of my Stat Dec and then spoke to Wilsons who provided false allegations that I was protesting the day before with Extinction Rebellion. The Extinction Rebellion were marching into parliament. I have no interest in ER whatsoever. Wilson’s went further to falsely claim I’d been kicked out of Parliament. This was untrue. I report this to my government and they ignored it and took no action in defence of democracy. What does that tell me about my government? I was banned for two weeks on false allegations for the period of Question Time. I believe it was because I wrote reports on Covid-19 in my own investigation to understand why our world was shutdown over an alleged mild virus. My work was done in the public interest not as a campaign but as a civil duty to understand the truth.

Covid-19 Senate reports:

Blog of Refused Entry to my Parliament:

I note that Wilsons were accused of crimes on Nauru and Manus islands. Why would this company be chosen to protect parliament?

I believe I am targeted and profiled for using my democratic voice in a democracy which under the current regime is now reframed as ‘dissident’ when I am not. I am a member of the public using my skills in research to find out the truth to ensure public safety and the right to say no under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution. It is done because I am a responsible person and I deeply care. I do not want the people of my country harmed.

The article below by a journalist raises serious corruption issues against Petter Dutton. As a woman, I note many women are being placed in positions of power as women are typically the upholders of ethics and humanity. I find it concerning that women are allowing themselves to be used and exploiting positions by engaging in deceptions. This betrays the public trust and weakens the public perception of women which creates more risk as distrust is generated.

Journalist Shane Dowling is one of the few independent journalist working alone to expose wrong doing at the highest levels. Peter Dutton was a former policeman. His Ministerial appointments are as follows:

  • Minister for Workforce Participation from 26.10.2004 to 27.1.2006.
  • Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer from 27.1.2006 to 3.12.2007.
  • Minister for Health from 18.9.2013 to 23.12.2014.
  • Minister for Sport from 18.9.2013 to 23.12.2014.
  • Cabinet Minister from 18.9.2013 to 23.5.2022.
  • Minister for Immigration and Border Protection from 23.12.2014 to 28.8.2018.
  • Minister for Home Affairs from 20.12.2017 to 30.3.2021.
  • Minister for Defence from 30.3.2021 to 23.5.2022.


As the Minister in charge of Home Affairs, a new department not recognised by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution, yet opened to protect Australians.

The Kangaroo Court article by journalist Shane Dowling raises issues in the public interest that should be investigated. If this is found to be true, there has to be peaceful ways to commence independent legal action without harassment or threats to ensure in our democracy all are EQUAL before the law.

If corruption is met with silence then we give a green light to practices that cause real harm and create cultures of abuse that are leading us to tyranny. I vote for democracy and anti-corruption commissions that serve WE THE PEOPLE and have the public on the commission not selected persons above scrutiny.

This is why we do not want data gathering. It is not in the public interest and can target innocent people.