Author
|
Topic: Opt Out COVID shot
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
The President’s plan to combat COVID-19 this fall has six main components, based on science and the best tools available to us now: 1. Vaccinating the Unvaccinated~ Noun /Adjective 1.To kill the resistance. 2.To divide the people as race but different.
Example- sneetches on the beaches, dr suis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VohyMXB4FLo
-------------------- That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
There is a legal difference between products approved under authorization of emergency use (EAU) compared with those the FDA has fully licensed. Pfizer shots are still under EUA, are not fully approved, and has a liability shield.
EUA-approved COVID shots have a liability shield under the 2005 Public Readiness and Preparedness Act. Vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers and government planners are immune from liability. People who have been injured can file a lawsuit if they can prove willful misconduct, and if the U.S. government has also brought an enforcement action against the party for willful misconduct.
Newly released U.S. government documents show that Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) provided funding for the gain-of-function research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that created novel coronaviruses with the ability to infect humans, and one previously undisclosed SARS-related coronavirus engineered at the Wuhan lab was reportedly demonstrated to be more pathogenic to humans than the virus from which it was originally constructed.
https://www.breitbart.com/health/2021/09/08/expert-documents-show-fauci-funded-wuhan-lab-created-novel-coronavirus-with-enhanced-pathogenicity-for-humans/
-------------------- That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
What to Know About Obeying an Unlawful Military Order
A Duty To Disobey Unlawful Orders?
The military oath taken at the time of induction into the military is as follows:
"I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
Notice the oath states, “I will obey the orders of the President of the United States...”, but the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 90 states that military personnel need to obey the "lawful orders of his/her superior. The duty and obligation to obey lawful orders creates no grey area for discussion. But does the military member have a duty to DISOBEY “unlawful orders” including orders of senior officers, Secretary of Defense and even the President of the United States? The UCMJ actually protects the soldier in this situation as he/she has a moral and legal obligation to the Constitution and not to obey unlawful orders and the people who issue them.
These have to be strong examples of a direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ and not the military member’s own opinion.
Military discipline and effectiveness are built on a foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey orders from their superiors immediately and without question, right from day one of boot camp.
BOOM! Major law firm confirms FDA deceived America with its confusing ‘approval’ of Pfizer vax
-------------------- That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
Early At-Home Treatments Could Save 85% of Covid Deaths
What You Need to Know About Early At-Home COVID Treatment
By Dr Joseph Mercola Story at-a-glance
Perhaps one of the greatest crimes in this whole pandemic is the refusal by reigning heath authorities to issue early treatment guidance. Instead, they’ve done everything possible to suppress remedies shown to work, whether it be corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with zinc, ivermectin, vitamin D or NAC According to Dr. Peter McCullough, 85% of COVID deaths could have been prevented had early treatment protocols been widely implemented rather than censored It appears the intense censoring and suppression of early treatments was a strategy to promote as much fear, suffering, hospitalization and death as possible in order to prepare the population to accept a new genre of gene transfer technologies on a mass scale The overwhelming drive to get a “needle in every arm” is such that health authorities are not even acknowledging the fact that those who have recovered from COVID-19 and many groups have no possibility of benefiting from the vaccine, including younger individuals, pregnant women, women of childbearing potential, and those with immunodeficiencies Despite FDA warnings for myocarditis with Pfizer and Moderna and cavernous venous thrombosis with Johnson & Johnson, the vaccine cabal keeps propaganda on full blast
In this interview, Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the importance of early treatment for COVID-19, and the potential motivations behind the suppression of safe and effective treatments.
McCullough has impeccable academic credentials. He’s an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas. He also has a master’s degree in public health and is known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States and is the editor of two medical journals. Early Outpatient Treatment Is Key for Positive Outcomes
McCullough has been an outspoken advocate for early treatment for COVID. In August 2020, McCullough’s landmark paper “Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection”1 was published online in the American Journal of Medicine.
The follow-up paper is titled “Multifaceted Highly Targeted Sequential Multidrug Treatment of Early Ambulatory High-Risk SARS-CoV-2 Infection (COVID-19)”2 and was published in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine in December 2020.
Perhaps one of the greatest crimes in this whole pandemic is the refusal by reigning heath authorities to issue early treatment guidance. Instead, they’ve done everything possible to suppress remedies shown to work, whether it be corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with zinc, ivermectin, vitamin D or NAC.
Patients were simply told to stay home and do nothing. Once the infection had worsened to the point of near-death, patients were told to go to the hospital where most were routinely placed on mechanical ventilation — a practice that was quickly discovered to be lethal. Many doctors also seemingly panicked and refused to see patients with COVID symptoms.
[…]
Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/07/11/early-treatment-for-covid.aspx?ui=26ae5a785a45f97d5e56bf4c7d0c2d6b647952a589d7936d74fc35371b657d40&sd=20210209&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20210711&mid=DM927029&rid=1205210463
-------------------- That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
(Opt Out Addendum 1) De Facto Mandates are Illegal You are receiving this notice on __________ (date). I, ________________________, am activating my rights and protection against de facto mandates. You may be unaware that De facto mandates to get around the law are also illegal. A “voluntary” COVID shot or test is a de facto mandate if an organization or institution: • Does not give information on the EUA mRNA injectables and recombinant vaccines or EUA test being voluntary - either by omission or commission; • Does not fully inform potential recipients of the known and potential risks of the EUA mRNA injectables and recombinant vaccines or EUA test; • Threatens to fire an employee, place employee on leave, or cut wages, if he/she does not submit to an EUA mRNA injectable, EUA recombinant vaccine or EUA test; • Encourages and allows peer pressure, bullying or discrimination from community members – such as in schools or at organizations or companies - to get an EUA mRNA injectable, EUA recombinant vaccine or EUA test; • Forces frequent EUA testing on those who cannot, for medical conditions or sincerely held religious beliefs, or do not want an EUA mRNA injectable or EUA recombinant vaccine; • Does not keep EUA vaccine status or EUA test results confidential, violating HIPPA and FERPA; • Coerces students and staff into taking EUA mRNA injectables, recombinant vaccines or tests by threatening to remove campus privileges, like dining hall, dorms, and in-person classroom learning; • Falsely imprisons a student or employee in a home, dorm, hotel, other building, or even confines her to a geographic area, under duress of losing employment or privileges – such as on-site or cafeteria privileges -- for refusing an EUA mRNA injectable, recombinant vaccine or test; • Imposes punitive measures for those who do not want an EUA mRNA injectable, recombinant vaccine, or EUA test, like masking, distancing, privileges, or separated learning, eating or working; • Issues a reward, incentive, or special community privilege to those who get an EUA mRNA injectable, recombinant vaccine or test, like the DailyPass app, a sticker, arm band, QR code, or an app dictating where someone can enter, creating a discriminatory environment for those who do not don the “reward” or show the pass; If an EUA product were to become fully licensed someday, I am also protected against disclosure of private medical information or any de facto violation of HIPPA laws and, in the public-school setting, FERPA law. By signing this letter, I have notified ________________________________ (organization), of my right to protection against De Facto Mandates from your organization. This protective notice is signed on behalf of myself or as guardian to a minor.
__________________________________ Printed Name ___________________________________ Signature ___________________________________ Minor’s Name (Optional) ___________________________________ Organization Notified
Received by _________________________from organization_______________________, on this day__________
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d49e2b300d396000117f616/t/6062f707c865782e09dcd104/1617098503841/Addendum+1-DeFactoMandates.pdf
Right to Refuse National RIGHT TO REFUSE
One of the most talked about issues right now are mandates. Mandates around testing, injections, masks, Emergency Use Authorization products, and more. At PERK, we believe all human beings have a right to refuse or choose what they put into their body. We have carefully designed document templates to support your Right to Refuse. You may use these to protect your rights, empower your knowledge, or notify your employer or school officials of the laws and regulations that protect you. Please consider an appropriate donation for use of our resources and support our mission. 12 Page Legislation Template, 7 Document Opt Out Packet Below:
HERE https://www.perk-group.com/right-to-refuse
-------------------- That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|