The Poisoning
Thou shall…
Lies are Unbekoming | March 10, 2024
Thou shall be poisoned.
My estimate points to 1 in 20 injections going IV accidentally. By that account, 670 million people worldwide would have been harmed, to a degree or another. And studies of accidental IV injections suggest that 127 million people have been harmed clinically.
Thou shall poison others.
There is a saying in military circles: once is a mistake. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is enemy action. I have no doubt that given an hour, the people on this panel could point to a hundred examples of the pattern I have just described, while finding even a handful of exceptions would pose a significant challenge.
–
The CDC has become an excellent guide to protecting your health, but only for people who realize you should do the opposite of whatever it advises.
Thou shall disguise The Poisoning.
Popular SSRIs include Fluoxetine (Prozac), Escitalopram (Lexapro), and Sertraline (Zoloft). Something well established about these drugs is that they have sexual side-effects. In fact, between 40 and 65% of people who take an SSRI are thought to experience some form of sexual dysfunction. What few people know, though, is these side effects can persist even after coming off of the drugs—a condition called Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction (PSSD).
–
There is no treatment. Despite PSSD being in the medical records since the ‘90s, patients are rarely warned of the risk. A risk thought to be 1 in 216.
–
In fact, according to this Stonewall report, more Gen Z Brits identify as asexual (5%) than gay (2%) or lesbian (3%).
Thou shall not tell the truth about The Poisoning.
And it is still happening. We are being surveilled and censored. We are being bullied and browbeat. We are goaded, taxed, nudged, and forced into accepting that which we do not want, whether it is EVs or CBDCs or mRNA. These efforts started with the rejection of science in favor of myth and the myths are still governing the world.
Whatever else we can say about these astonishing developments, this much we can pronounce. We were wrong to trust the authorities. We were wrong to put faith in leaders. We were wrong to look to the universities, the media, and journals, and the experts generally. They failed us. They lied to us.
Thou shall silence those that wish to tell the truth about The Poisoning.
In a world where ‘equity’ is the catch-cry of corporatists accumulating unprecedented wealth, the return of colonialism should not surprise. Colonialism, after all, brings great benefits to those whom it disempowers and pillages. Success requires a highly centralized approach to achieve mass control, restricting freedom ‘for the greater good’ whilst silencing those who disagree.
Thou shall target The Poisoning at The Spirit and Connection.
The introduction of fluoride into the drinking water supply in the 1950s caused perturbations in this social magnetic field (calcifying the pineal gland amongst other harms).
The introduction of mass vaccination campaigns caused further disruptions of the magnetic field thus throwing confusion into the relationships between people.
The widespread use of SSRI’s starting in the early 1990s and the vast deployment of electromagnetic fields for wireless (mobile phone) communication expanded this assault on the social magnetic field.
Over time the field weakened.
In 2019/2020 we got hit with a triple whammy — the release of SARS-CoV-2, the largest propaganda campaign in history, and the rollout of 5G. By this point, most progressives no longer had a working moral compass because the social magnetic field that formerly guided them was gone. They no longer felt a connection with the poor, working class, or the disadvantaged. The subaltern was objectified and viewed as unclean. The working class was turned into delivery drivers so that the laptop class could continue on with their Elysium lifestyle.
–
I argue that this disconnection is what happened to all knowledge production fields as a result of the waves of mass poisonings over the last seventy-five years.
Thou shall recruit and develop The Stupid, as they are the necessary soldiers of The Poisoning.
Stupidity is an obnoxious, frustrating and yet very constant and obtrusive feature of the systems that rule us. I emphasise this quality because I think the accent of much dissident commentary is too much on the malicious, authoritarian and often evil nature of government in the West. Don’t misunderstand me. The powers that be are very bad too, but it’s important not to lose sight of the fact that their collective actions and statements are often just astoundingly dumb. Probably never in the history of humanity has stupidity been so abundant, and so apparently ineradicable, as it is now.
Thou shall make your living by poisoning.
With the world turning full circle, post-World War Two concepts of human rights, equality, and local agency are exiting the international stage. The veiled colonialism currently dressed up as vaccine equity looks like a bunch of colonial bureaucrats forcing their sponsors’ wares on those with less power, whilst building policies to ensure this imbalance remains. Malnutrition, infectious disease, child marriage, and generational poverty are side issues to the East India Pharma and Software Company’s bottom lines. This will stop when those being colonized once again unite and refuse to comply. In the meantime, the enablers could open their eyes and understand who they are working for.
Thou shall poison the poisoned.
Which terrifies me given the surge in SSRI prescriptions among Gen Z. In the UK, 1 in 3 teenagers aged 12 to 18 has been prescribed antidepressants. In 2022 alone, the number of children aged 13 to 19 taking antidepressants rose by 6,000 to 173,000. That’s kids taking drugs known to cause sexual dysfunction—drugs that the Royal College of Psychiatrists admits to using to castrate sex offenders—right during puberty.
–
This seems especially true for girls and young women. In the US, 86% of those identifying as asexual are female, and 91% are aged between 18 to 27. Which is also the demographic with some of the fastest-rising rates in the use of mental health medication. Women and adults aged 18 to 29 in America have the highest rates of current depression or depression treatment. Women are also twice as likely to take antidepressants than men.
Thou shall profit from poisoning the poisoned.
These are all in the top 20 blockbuster drugs in the world.
Then there is Risperdal for autism, Ritalin for ADHD, and Epi pens for severe allergic reactions, and these drugs generate several billion dollars a year in revenue as well.
What most people don’t realize is that these are all treatments for vaccine injuries. The childhood vaccine schedule creates customers for life.
Thou shall receive the wealth of the poisoned.
My specialty is modeling the costs of autism. A study I conducted with Mark Blaxill and Cynthia Nevison showed about $300 billion a year in current costs rising to over a trillion dollars a year in costs by the early 2030s and $5.5 trillion a year by 2060.
The costs of autism will cause the economic and political collapse of the United States in our lifetime.
Thou shall not punish The Poisoning.
As for the producer side, it hasn’t been truly free since 1910. That’s when the so-called Flexner Report came out to push for an allopathic cartel that came to control medical schools, driving up the price of services through a credentialing racket, while blocking alternative forms of care. The wisdom of the ages was toast.
As for pharma, it has not operated in a free market for nearly half a century. The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 allowed private companies to keep “intellectual property”—a wholly unnecessary monopoly—and pay patent royalties to government agencies, thus integrating the two sectors in a financial racket.
The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act was also a catastrophe, allowing mass distribution of untested products on people who have no recourse when they go wrong. The PREP Act of 2006 expanded that to all medical countermeasures used in an emergency.
Thou shall punish those that prevent The Poisoning.
On February 14, the French National Assembly passed article 223-1-2 du code pénal. Contained therein, in Article 4 of that law, Robert Kogon writes:
Article 4 introduces a new crime into the French penal code: incitation to abandon or refrain from medical treatment or to adopt a would-be treatment, if, “in the current state of medical knowledge”, doing so “clearly” may cause harm to the person or persons in question. This crime is made punishable by one year in prison and a fine of €30,000 (£26,000) or, if the “incitation” has effect, i.e. the medical advice is followed, three years in prison and a fine of €45,000 (£39,000).
In effect, this is an extreme gag order on physicians, other health care personnel, and indeed anyone who dares speak out against official medical orthodoxy. In terrifyingly broad wording, it criminalizes – with hard time and crippling fines – advising against the received medical wisdom, even if the advice is not followed.
It does not take a doctor, lawyer, or medical ethicist to imagine the effect this will have on medical practice. Put simply, this law will destroy the doctor-patient relationship.
The UK Government Is Considering a New, Looser Definition of “Extremism”
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 9, 2024
The authorities in the UK are continuing with attempts to broaden the definition of “extremism” and behavior deemed as “undermining/overturning” British values.
Critics say the whole wiggly thing is the road to authoritarianism.
A new step said to be in that direction is a proposal presented by Communities Secretary Michael Gove, who is reportedly using previous initiatives to usher in a new definition of extremism.
Likely to cover all political and ideological bases, Gove is mentioning both “Islamists” and “far Right” organizations and their harmful activities that slip under the radar as the reason the current understanding of extremism is “too narrow.”
But there doesn’t seem to be consensus on this in the cabinet, with some ministers voicing fears that a lot of groups taking a stance on several issues – such as those opposed to lockdowns, religious organizations that are anti-abortion, gay marriage, trans-gender women in places designated as same-sex, “radical” student groups, etc. – could get caught up in this widened “definition dragnet.”
The problem with that is that these groups are now operating lawfully, according to the Equality Act 2010.
And if the definition is also made enforceable, even political parties, such as the Scottish National Party, could end up on the wrong side of the new rules, reports say.
Right now, extremism in the UK is defined (since 2011) as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”
This definition is not statutory, which means it effectively prevents only the government and other administrative bodies from working with or funding such groups.
But Gove wants to “fix” this by making the broader definition statutory.
To achieve this, the current paragraph would get this addition:
“The promotion or advancement of any ideology which aims to overturn or undermine the UK’s system of parliamentary democracy, its institutions and values; or threaten the rights of individuals or create a permissive environment for radicalization, hate crime and terrorism.”
Rather than just “broader,” this reads as straight-up and worrisomely vague.
And when some political representatives, MPs among them, try to wrap their heads around the very concept of “British values,” it becomes clear that the conundrum of defining such things in a way acceptable to everyone becomes mission impossible.
“What does it even mean to undermine British values’ when there is no consensus – and certainly no legal definition – of what those values are?,” MP Miriam Cates summed it up.
CANADA THREATENS LIFE SENTENCES FOR “HATRED”
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | March 7, 2024
Canada’s proposed bill, C-63, lays out liberty-crushing, due process annihilating terms for ill-defined thought crimes such as ‘fear of hate propaganda.’ Meanwhile, Ireland has a similar bill as the public is seeing a hidden hand crafting legislation aimed to disrupt society.
New Law Would Make COVID Vaccine Makers Liable for Injuries, Deaths
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 6, 2024
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) on Tuesday introduced a bill that would allow Americans to sue the manufacturers of COVID-19 vaccines for vaccine-related adverse events, including deaths by removing the vaccine makers’ liability shield.
The Let Injured Americans Be Legally Empowered Act, or the LIABLE Act, would “allow Americans who took vaccines that were misleadingly promoted and forced onto many Americans via federal mandates to pursue civil litigation for their injuries,” according to a summary of the bill publicized by Fox News.
“These vaccines were given emergency use authorization unilaterally and did not go through the normal FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] approval process,” the summary stated.
Commenting on the proposed legislation, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) President Mary Holland said:
“The damages and fatalities caused by the COVID-19 vaccine demand accountability. This legislation represents a critical milestone in rectifying these injustices and paving the way for a more accountable future. This legislation is crucial for holding vaccine manufacturers accountable.”
CHD is among the organizations supporting the legislation.
According to Roy’s office, “COVID-19 vaccines are considered ‘countermeasures’ under the Public Readiness and Preparedness (PREP) Act, which broadly shields their manufacturers from civil liability related to losses stemming from the vaccines.”
“Instead, injured Americans must seek relief under the onerous Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) — but only 11 COVID-19-related claims have been paid out of CICP.”
Holland said the CICP is “wholly inadequate and inconsistent with constitutional principles in providing just redress.”
The proposed legislation would remove all federal liability protections for the COVID-19 vaccine, preserve the ability of injured Americans to access pre-existing compensation programs, such as the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), and would be retroactive, allowing Americans vaccinated and injured before the bill’s passage to sue.
In a statement, Roy said, “The long train of abuses committed by the government and public health establishment in response to COVID-19 will continue to impact the American people for years to come.”
As a result, Roy said he is “introducing the LIABLE Act to empower Americans to remove crony federal liability protections for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and empower injured Americans. The American people deserve justice for the infringement on their personal medical freedom and those medically harmed deserve restitution.”
React19, a nonprofit organization that advocates on behalf of vaccine injury victims, also welcomed the proposed legislation. Dr. Joel Wallskog, a Wisconsin orthopedic surgeon who no longer practices due to injuries he sustained from the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, is co-chair of the organization. He told The Defender:
“React19 supports the LIABLE Act. The COVID-19 public health emergency ended in 2023. Despite this, pharmaceutical companies, the government, and health care organizations are still protected from all liability through the PREP Act until at least Dec. 31, 2024.
“This blanket immunity provided by the PREP Act robs the American public injured by the COVID-19 shots of their right to due process and jury trial. We are relegated to CICP, which is an obvious failure.”
‘Hindsight will show this was absolutely necessary’
According to Fox News, the PREP Act “limits liability for the manufacturing, development and distribution of medical countermeasures related to a public health emergency.” COVID-19 vaccines were distributed in the U.S. on this basis.
In turn, the PREP Act created CICP, “which has a one-year statute of limitations and only provides compensation in the event of death or serious injury,” Fox News reported. As a result, COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers “are mostly immune from civil lawsuits, even if those seeking money damages have medical proof of their vaccine-related injuries.”
“Millions of Americans were forced to take a COVID-19 shot out of fear of losing their livelihoods and under false pretenses,” Roy told Fox News on Tuesday, contrasting the 11 claims compensated by CICP with the 700 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines which have been administered in the U.S.
Wallskog said CICP “has a 98% denial rate” and, as of Jan. 1, has issued a total “of about $41,000” for the 11 claims it has compensated — an average of approximately $3,700 per claim.
Ray Flores, senior outside counsel for CHD, is an expert on the PREP Act and CICP. He told The Defender he “would be thrilled” to see PREP Act manufacturer protection removed. “Someday, hindsight will show this was absolutely necessary,” Flores said.
Flores noted that U.S. government guarantees made to vaccine manufacturers early during the pandemic prohibited the government from “using or authorizing COVID-19 vaccine” unless they were “protected from liability under a declaration issued under the PREP Act, or a successor COVID-19 PREP Act declaration of equal or greater scope.”
“If this bill proceeds, this will be the battleground,” Flores said.
Lawsuits will help determine if COVID vaccines were as ‘safe and effective’ as claimed
Big Pharma did not welcome the proposed legislation. In a statement shared with Fox News, Andrew Powaleny, senior director of public affairs for PhRMA [Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America], an industry trade group, said:
“COVID-19 has been a reminder of why we need safe and effective vaccines. All vaccines, including those for COVID-19, are subject to a rigorous safety and efficacy review process and post-market monitoring.
“By upending the existing liability framework manufacturers rely upon to provide predictable vaccine development, our ability to address future public health threats will be at risk.”
But other experts disagreed. Writing Tuesday in The Blaze, commentator and author Daniel Horowitz asked, “Should a product that is completely funded, marketed, monopolized, and then mandated by government be less liable than Toyota is for its airbags?”
Horowitz added, “Ideally, the NCVIA [the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986] and the PREP Act should be repealed entirely.”
Still, he welcomed Roy’s proposed legislation. “Giving consumers their day in court will be the perfect way to sort out whether Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products are as safe and effective as they claim,” he wrote.
“It’s highly likely that tens of millions of people are currently without recourse for compensation from a product that was fraudulently foisted upon the American people by these companies in collusion with the federal government,” Horowitz said. “Knowing that, Roy’s bill comes as welcome relief.”
According to Fox News, “Roy has led the charge against those vaccine mandates, including leading efforts to roll back COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the U.S. military.”
Co-sponsors of the bill include Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.), Eric Burlison (R-Mo.), Michael Cloud (R-Texas), Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), Bob Good (R-Va.), Clay Higgins (R-La.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Barry Moore (R-Utah), Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Randy Weber (R-Texas), Troy Nehls (R-Texas), Andy Harris (R-Md.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho), Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.).
“Americans injured by the COVID-19 shots deserve better,” Wallskog said. “They did what they thought was the right thing for themselves, their families and the nation. Now, they are left abandoned. This legislation gives them a chance at fair and just compensation.”
“The time has come for our nation to recognize these injuries and allow them legal recourse,” he added.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Pre-crime: Canada’s Justice Minister defends “Online Harms Bill” powers to place people under house arrest, cut internet access
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 5, 2024
Canada is facing stiff competition from many countries around the world, some of them labeled as “authoritarian,” in the race to institutionalize and normalize, and write into law, some distinctly dystopian concepts, like “pre-crime.”
And unfortunately for Canada’s democracy, its government seems to be doing very well in this aspect.
Justice Minister and Attorney General Arif Virani is currently defending a bizarre provision contained in the country’s “online harms” (C-63) bill that allows the authorities to place people under house arrest out of “fear” they could, at some point in the future, commit a “hate crime.”
Alternatively, citizens singled out in this way will be made to wear a tracking device – an electronic tag.
“Awful and unlawful” is how critics might describe the bill, which, judging by the minister’s comments, the government wants to rush through the parliament. However, Virani is trying to put a positive spin on it by suggesting it is some kind of democratic breakthrough that finds a balance that allows “awful but lawful” content to be kept online.
Meanwhile, what about the people who post it? Some of them will be kept at home or surveilled around the clock, which is the sum total of the provision. And Virani – who, in his role as attorney general, along with a judge, will be the one to decide who qualifies for this treatment – sees nothing wrong with any of it.
“(If) there’s a genuine fear of an escalation, then an individual or group could come forward and seek a peace bond against them and to prevent them from doing certain things,” Virani said of the “suspected future suspects.”
In Canada, according to the Criminal Code, a peace bond is issued “when a person appears likely to commit a criminal offense, but there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an offense has actually been committed.”
Virani explained that such a peace bond could impose restrictions on people approaching “a synagogue or a mosque” (presumably, also a church). Or, their use of the internet, but also somehow behavior could get “restricted,” he continued.
“That would help to deradicalize people who are learning things online and acting out in the real world violently, sometimes fatally,” said the official.
C-63 also seeks to introduce the life sentence for those who commit “a hate crime offense” along with another type of crime.
Such is the messaging and the climate created by this type of legislation that the Canadian press finds it necessary to reassure people while reporting about C-63’s life imprisonment provision, that it will not apply in cases of “mischief to a garage door.”
But if it did – one might be amazed, but at this point in time, hardly surprised.
CHD Urges Vermont Lawmakers to Reject Bill That Would Allow Kids 12 and Under to Consent to HPV Vaccines
By John-Michael Dumais | The Defender | March 5, 2024
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) last week submitted written testimony to the Vermont Senate Health and Welfare Committee opposing a proposed bill that would allow children as young as 12 to receive certain vaccines — including the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine — without parental knowledge or consent.
Senate Bill S.151 states on page 1 that it “proposes to allow a minor 12 years of age or older to consent to medical care for the prevention of a sexually transmitted infection.” The bill does not specifically mention vaccines.
However, according to CHD’s New England Chapter, the American Academy of Pediatrics, Planned Parenthood and other groups that want to offer confidential preventative services to minors — including HPV vaccines, hepatitis vaccines, HIV PrEP pills and other products — are lobbying for the bill.
In their testimony, CHD President Mary Holland and General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg argued that HPV vaccines have never been proven to prevent cancer, that the vaccines have caused significant injuries and that bypassing parental consent violates federal law.
They also questioned whether minors could reasonably be expected to understand the potential long-term health risks of these vaccines.
In their testimony, Holland and Rosenberg, authors of “The HPV Vaccine On Trial: Seeking Justice For A Generation Betrayed,” wrote:
“Teens … understandably may not want to have children immediately but do they want to risk not having any children in the future? If they do not know the real risks and the minimal (if any) potential benefits of HPV vaccines, can they give informed consent?”
CHD urged the Vermont Senate Health and Welfare Committee to withdraw S.151. CHD’s New England Chapter recommended Vermonters take immediate action to help defeat the bill.
Evidence for HPV vaccines preventing cancer questioned
CHD’s testimony challenged the claim that HPV vaccines have been proven to prevent cancer, arguing that there is no conclusive evidence to support this assertion.
Holland and Rosenberg cited government data showing the cancer rate for the youngest, most vaccinated women increased between 2011 and 2019 to the same level as when the vaccines were first introduced.
They also cited evidence from the National Cancer Institute, which shows little change in the incidence and death rates of cervical cancer in young and middle-aged women since the introduction of HPV vaccines in the U.S.
The greatest decreases in cervical cancer incidence rates were observed in older women, who likely never received an HPV vaccine, according to CHD’s testimony.
Data also suggest that regular screening, such as a pap smear, is a more effective and affordable method for reducing cervical cancer rates. Yet data show girls who receive the HPV vaccine are less likely to undergo regular screening.
CHD’s testimony included a graphic illustrating that only 0.18% of HPV infections worldwide, including in countries with less screening and more significant exposures to co-factors that contribute to cervical cancer, ever progress to cervical cancer.
CHD emphasized that the need for HPV vaccines, particularly in higher-resource countries like the U.S., is questionable given the effectiveness of screening methods and the fact that the vast majority of HPV infections clear on their own.
HPV vax harmful, trials lacked proper placebo
Holland and Rosenberg delved deeper into the potential risks associated with HPV vaccines — particularly Merck’s Gardasil and Gardasil 9 — arguing that the clinical trials for these vaccines were inadequate and failed to properly assess the vaccines’ safety.
The clinical trials for Gardasil 9, currently the only HPV vaccine available in the U.S., were “bootstrapped to the original formulation of Gardasil, approved in 2006,” according to the testimony.
This methodology, CHD claimed, resulted in a lack of “true controlled clinical trial safety data because the safety of the original Gardasil was never compared to an inert saline placebo.”
Instead, Merck compared the vaccine to its “bioactive aluminum (a known neurotoxin) adjuvant — an ingredient specifically intended to heighten an immune system response to the vaccine.”
This lack of proper safety testing, combined with the absence of saline placebos and other clinical trial manipulations, should raise concerns about allowing children to make decisions about receiving the HPV vaccine — particularly the potential impact on their future fertility — without parental involvement, CHD said.
Holland and Rosenberg cited their book “The HPV Vaccine On Trial,” which they said “details the many concerning questions raised by the Gardasil clinical trials and the injuries reported therein and in the marketplace.”
A search of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System revealed “75,727 … reports of injury, including thousands of serious and disabling injuries, and 629 deaths” related to HPV vaccines as of Jan. 26, 2024, according to CHD’s testimony. “The majority of reported adverse events occurred in children under age 17,” Holland and Rosenberg wrote.
CHD pointed to the more than 100 cases now pending against Merck “for serious, life-altering injuries, many of which are autoimmune in nature, to young women and men following receipt of Merck’s HPV vaccines.”
Rosenberg is one of the attorneys representing plaintiffs in multi-district litigation against Merck.
Bill violates federal law
Holland and Rosenberg argued the Vermont bill violates federal law and is unconstitutional. They cited the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which requires parents to receive Vaccine Information Statements before their child is vaccinated.
“Therefore, the bill is clearly unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution,” the testimony stated. The Supremacy Clause establishes that federal law is the supreme law of the land and that in most cases it preempts state law when there is a conflict.
CHD also pointed to a 2022 federal court decision in Booth v. Bowser resulting in a preliminary injunction against a similar law in Washington, D.C., on the grounds it conflicted with the federal law.
CHD warned that Vermont could face a similar outcome if S.151 is passed, noting U.S. District Court Judge Trevor N. McFadden’s conclusion in the case:
“States and the District are free to encourage individuals — including children — to get vaccines. But they cannot transgress on the Program Congress created. And they cannot trample the Constitution.”
CHD also cited the Mature Minor Doctrine Clarification Act, a Tennessee law signed by the state’s governor in May 2023. The law recognizes the applicability of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act’s requirement for healthcare providers to provide a Vaccine Information Statement to a minor’s parent or guardian before vaccination.
Other testimony submitted in opposition to the bill can be found here.
John-Michael Dumais is a news editor for The Defender. He has been a writer and community organizer on a variety of issues, including the death penalty, war, health freedom and all things related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
‘Too many people watched’ – George Galloway explains why RT was banned
RT | March 5, 2024
Fresh from his election to the British parliament, MP George Galloway spoke with RT on Tuesday about the state of media freedom in Britain and London’s disastrous policies in the Middle East and Ukraine.
Galloway trounced both Tory and Labour candidates in last week’s Rochdale by-election, winning twice as many votes than both major parties combined. PM Rishi Sunak denounced the result as “beyond alarming” and a threat to “our democracy itself.”
As Galloway pointed out, however, he has been elected to Parliament a total of seven times – far more than Sunak or Labour leader Keir Starmer.
“These people are hypocrites. Things like democracy, human rights, rule of law, rules-based international order, it’s just lipstick on a pig. They wipe the lipstick off whenever they no longer feel the need to look prettier,” he claimed.
“As Sunak’s speech outside Number 10 [Downing Street] on Friday about my election makes clear, it’s not beyond them even to cancel elections,” he added.
British authorities have banned RT and the Iranian PressTV outright, refused to renew the license of China’s CGTN, and blocked outlets like Venezuela’s TeleSur.
“The reason is pretty simple if you think about it: Too many people were watching these TV channels. Too many people were watching RT. Not just in Britain, but even more so in Germany. That is why RT was closed down. Because too many of the public were watching it. How’s that for freedom?” said Galloway.
The best illustration of press freedom in the UK is that “a good friend of mine is lying in the dungeon of Belmarsh top security prison,” Galloway said.
“His name is Julian Assange He is convicted of no crime. And yet he is being held with mass murderers and terrorists in the worst prison for the worst people in England. And for what? For telling the truth as a publisher.”
He admitted the government might retaliate against him for speaking to RT, but said, “I don’t care.”
“I give interviews to everybody. I’m a free man, I’m an elected free man. I have the right to speak and I will go on speaking to whomsoever wants to hear me. Nothing is solved by covering things up. Nothing is solved by denying people access to a different point of view,” Galloway said, recalling RT’s long-time slogan, “Question More.”
Galloway is no stranger to RT. He has written many op-eds for the outlet and hosted his own TV show called ‘Sputnik Orbiting the World’ during his hiatus from Parliament.
Did Covid-19 Threaten the Life of a Nation?
A Better Way with Dr Tess Lawrie | March 5, 2024
Was Covid-19 a Trojan Horse for an attempted New World Order?
Many consider Covid-19 to have been a worldwide ‘Trojan Horse’ event that enabled human rights and freedoms to be trampled, dangerous medical interventions to be normalised, and an unprecedented transfer of wealth to take place from ordinary people to the super-rich. There is deep concern too that this was just a trial run, and that the immanent promulgation of the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) ‘Pandemic Treaty’ and amended International Health Regulations will take these tyrannical measures to an entirely different level.
In response to these concerns, the World Council for Health (WCH) has published a Legal Brief on Preventing the Abuse of Public Health Emergencies. This document explains how governments used the declaration of an unjustifiable state of emergency as a legal instrument to deny people their basic human rights and freedoms, and to grant themselves extraordinary powers.
Did Covid-19 meet the pre-requisites to declare a legitimate state of emergency?
The critical question that should have been addressed at the time was whether the threat posed by Covid-19 represented a public health emergency that threatened the life of the nation. The Legal Brief presents four criteria to be used to determine if a state of emergency should be declared. These criteria state that the threat should:
- be actual or imminent;
- involve the whole nation;
- place the continuation of the organised life of society at risk of extinction; and
- be so extraordinary that ordinary measures for protecting public health and order are clearly inadequate.
The arguments presented in this thoroughly referenced document show that the Covid-19 event never actually met any of these criteria. Thus, as it did not meet the legal conditions of an emergency ‘threatening the life of a nation’, all derogation measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, school and small business closures, travel restrictions, and harmful vaccine mandates, were illegal breaches of International Human Rights Law (IHRL).
All States have a legal obligation to enact public policy that protects, respects, and ensures fundamental human rights. Furthermore, certain norms and fundamental human rights exist that can never be violated, not even during a declared state of emergency. Instead, during Covid-19, governments around the world chose to follow the recommendations of WHO, ignore the rights of citizens, and enact oppressive public health actions. It is also of huge concern that human rights organisations failed to hold governments to account for their abuse of emergency measures.
The Legal Brief maintains that, had people across the board been properly informed about the requirements of IHRL and the prerequisites necessary to declare a legitimate state of emergency, these gross violations of fundamental human rights would not have been possible.
Recommendations
To prevent future public health emergencies resulting in similar human rights abuses, the Legal Brief therefore recommends the following actions:
- To educate the public regarding the criteria to declare a legitimate state of emergency;
- To establish panels to monitor adherence to IHRL and communicate violations; and
- To establish activist groups to take necessary proactive legal action.
As the Legal Brief concludes:
… the widespread misuse of emergency measures during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed the view that, de facto, there “are no ultimate institutional safeguards available for ensuring that emergency powers be used for the purpose of preserving the Constitution.” The only thing that can guarantee this is the people’s own knowledge of the law, proactive legal action, and their determination to ensure that their governments do not abuse their discretionary power by imposing self-serving, biased, or arbitrary limitations on fundamental human rights.
We trust that this Legal Brief will be useful to lawyers and lay people alike in furthering legal and lawful recourse in the pursuit of Truth and Justice. You can download the full brief here.
Pennsylvania Collaborates With DHS and CISA To Monitor Online Election-Related Speech
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | March 4, 2024
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Governor, Josh Shapiro, announced last week that, in an effort to address perceived “threats” to electoral procedures, the state is launching an initiative in partnership with various state and federal agencies.
These partners include the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and, notably, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), an organization long accused of aiding online censorship to impede freewheeling online speech.
The revelation about Pennsylvania’s collaboration with DHS and CISA surfaced after The Federalist pressed the Pennsylvania State Department for more information about the new initiative.
This program, named the Pennsylvania Election Threats Task Force, is expected to bring forth measures for the protection of the electoral system, safeguard voters from any form of intimidation, and provide accessible and trustworthy information about the election.
Al Schmidt, Secretary of the Commonwealth, stated that the task force would focus on addressing lies and baseless “conspiracy theories” aiming to delegitimize the electoral process.
Accusations have been levied against CISA for serving as the epicenter of the federal government’s efforts to censor speech, which is seen as an assault on civil liberties and First Amendment rights.
Documents acquired by America First Legal uncovered that CISA, despite being aware of the risks associated with unsupervised mail-in voting in the 2020 election, dismissed social media posts voicing similar concerns as “disinformation.”
Featured Video
EUROPE FEARS RUSSIA’S NEXT MOVE / Ian Proud
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
New Book
New Book: No Autoimmunity The Body Doesn’t Attack Itself
Lies are Unbekoming | September 24, 2026
The label for Humira, once the best-selling drug in the world, lists its risks in plain print. One of them, in the label’s own words, is new “autoimmune” disease.
A drug prescribed for a condition labelled autoimmune carries a warning that it can cause a condition labelled autoimmune. That contradiction sits in every box, on a folded paper almost nobody reads.
My new book starts there.
No Autoimmunity: The Body Doesn’t Attack Itself
For seventy years, “your body is attacking itself, and we don’t know why” has ended the conversation for people diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, Hashimoto’s, Type 1 diabetes, Crohn’s and psoriasis. More than eighty conditions now carry the autoimmune label. The diagnosis comes with a prescription for life. It almost never comes with a question about cause.
This book asks the question and answers it from the framework’s own records: its drug labels, its journals, its regulatory filings, and its own experiments. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Iran offers Trump deal before US election
- Merz regime wants ‘secret police’ – opposition
- Israeli settlers terrorize West Bank Palestinians with state-provided drones: Report
- They see them, then kill them: Israeli quadcopters track, deliberately target civilians in Gaza
- Debunked: Trump’s egregious UNGA claims on war against Iran crumble under scrutiny
- Europe was part of the infrastructure of US aggression against Iran: Deputy FM
- New evidence on the Bucha Massacre
- Italy and France debunk reports CIA issued ‘Russian drone threat’ warning
- How Russia is Rewiring the Global South
- Britain’s elites want you ready to die for a war they keep imagining
- If Americans Knew
- Trump betrayed voters with his campaign lies and prioritized a foreign country once he took office
- Netanyahu calls Israel’s war in Gaza ‘opposite of genocide’ in UN speech to near-empty hall
- Settler Kidnappings: Torture, Sexual Abuse and Terrorisation of Palestinian Abductees as Israel Deepens Annexation of West Bank
- Gaza winter nears as 162,000 tents become unusable, raising fears of humanitarian crisis
- Netanyahu says, “It’s the opposite of genocide”; UN says Gaza economy is world’s ‘most severe crisis on record’ – Daily Update
- Israel’s US-Backed Assault on Gaza Has Created the ‘World’s Most Severe Economic Crisis on Record’: UN
- ‘Protecting U.S. Citizens’… From Israel
- ‘This is where I live now, the back of a truck’: a day in the life of a grandmother in Gaza
- In UN Speech, Iran’s President Displays Pictures of Children Killed by US, Brings Attention to Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal
- Israel displaces hundreds of Palestinians amid wave of demolitions in West Bank
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
