Tag Archives: legal

Hear NZ lawyer Sue Grey speak on informed consent & your legal rights around vaccination

Sue Grey

Sue Grey LLB(Hons), BSc, RSHDipPHI and specialist in emerging issues shares her thoughts and perspectives on the experimental Co-vax, body sovereignty, informed consent and your legal rights. This is not intended as legal advice but to help you ask questions and make mindful decisions.

Netherlands legalizes euthanasia for terminally ill children; Belgian children also being euthanized & Canada embraces assisted suicide

Human life & its sanctity now throwaway items sadly. Sickness & death everywhere & it is being normalized. EWR

“The Netherlands has agreed on plans to make euthanasia legal for terminally ill children under the age of 12.”

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2020/october/unbelievably-evil-netherlands-legalizes-euthanasia-for-terminally-sick-children-under-12?fbclid=IwAR1w55VcGkQHSGCBQ5BNDniFFM_5W-Zo43gEnu8ytdVwriQ2Zy5UAF5IxpM

“According to a recently released report, three children in Belgium under the age of 18 were given lethal injections after they chose to die.”

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/2018/august/belgian-children-being-euthanized-as-canada-also-embraces-culture-of-legally-assisted-suicide?fbclid=IwAR3P7Azl4kl4zWsAn8wP3hlHckfhOoK7l2tyB7cBAeQ-ABDZuJNAxedw9ak

Did the UK settle this lawsuit to make sure the corruption of its COVID testing doesn’t come to light at trial?

Government to pay £2m to settle coronavirus testing case

The UK has agreed to settle a lawsuit over how it selected an IT contract for coronavirus testing at its Lighthouse labs.

The BBC understands that the settlement will cost the government up to £2m.

British company Diagnostics AI claimed it lost out to a European rival UgenTec despite spotting some positive coronavirus cases its rival missed.

It sued the government over the decision, claiming the selection process was “unfair and unlawful”.

Lighthouse labs are a UK-wide network of specialist coronavirus laboratories managed by the government and run by private firms. When the labs were set up, companies pitched to analyse the test results.

The dispute was due to be played out in court. It would have meant a public examination of the accuracy and speed of the testing system, at a time when it has come under serious criticism.

But the government has decided to settle the case and will pay Diagnostics AI compensation and most of its legal fees.

However, despite agreeing to the payout, the government has refuted the claims made by Diagnostics AI, saying they are “inaccurate”.

“The tests are reliable and effective, the laboratories that undertake them have been reviewed and assessed by experts and the percentage of false negatives or positives is tiny,” said a Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson.

“This was a commercial dispute over a software contract where a number of factors were considered before it was awarded, which is still subject to final agreement over costs.”

As the contract was worth more than £1m, the BBC understands the settlement including legal costs could amount to around £2m.

Dispute over contract decision

Swabs are taken from people at testing sites or home tests and treated with a chemical process that produces a graph. The software is used to determine whether the graphs show the sample was positive or negative for coronavirus. Image copyright WPA Pool Image caption Software is used to analyse swabs to determine whether a sample is positive or negative for coronavirus

Diagnostics AI claimed UgenTec’s analysis of a trial run of 2,000 samples was flawed. In some cases, it claimed UgenTec found negative coronavirus results, when the results were actually positive or inconclusive.

“The system that they ultimately went with and decided to pay for missed around 50 out of 800 positive [results], so that’s around one in 15, or so, one in 16 – to be precise – positives,” Diagnostics AI’s chief executive Aron Cohen told the BBC.

“Obviously when that translates to hundreds of thousands of samples a day, that’s potentially thousands of missed positives going out every day. So that was really worrying for us.”

UgenTec in return claimed that no patients were affected at all as it was a trial run.

“We provide crucial covid interpretation services to the Lighthouse Labs to help them manage the vast amounts of data they generate. These claims are inaccurate and misleading,” UgenTec’s chief executive Steven Verhoeven told the BBC.

“None of these samples refer to actual results given to patients or the public and to imply any public health impact is wrong. Live tests were not being supported by our software at the time which was in the process of being implemented. As illustrated by independent tests, we have every confidence in our software and the services we provide.”

‘A commercial dispute’

Two non-profit companies owned and funded by the government were also sued by Diagnostics AI – namely UK Biocentre and Medicines Delivery Catapult (MDC), which ran the process to decide which company to use.

Court papers show that between 31 March and 14 April, Diagnostics AI repeatedly requested information about exactly what services were required and how their bid would be evaluated.

Diagnostics AI say it never received the information it asked for. This is refuted by UK Biocentre, which says both providers were given the same information. Image copyright NurPhoto Image caption Local authorities are permitted to purchase services without engaging in a competitive process if there is a significant risk to life

When the two bids were being considered in early April, the UK was facing what Boris Johnson had called a “moment of national emergency”.

In such urgent circumstances, the law does make provision for the government to buy services without a competitive process, if certain conditions are met.

However, it is understood that both Diagnostics AI and Ugentec had been recommended to UK Biocentre, and so a decision was made to evaluate both offers.

Diagnostics AI says this process was unfair and flawed, but UK Biocentre insists it was fair to both bidders.

A spokesperson for UK Biocentre said: “The allegations are groundless; this was a commercial dispute. The software in question is being used widely in the Lighthouse Laboratories, in some NHS laboratories and abroad.

“External quality assurance has confirmed that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in the Lighthouse Laboratories, of which the automated diagnostic software forms part, is performing well.”

A spokesperson for MDC also provided the BBC with a statement: “The full results of evaluation identified UgenTec as a safe and quality provider, able to deliver in high volumes, and with a comprehensive support system in place. It has performed superbly over the past six months, analysing over eight million test results for the nation. The litigation was purely a commercial dispute.”

The BBC understands that investigations were carried out into the claims made by Diagnostics AI, but concluded that concerns over the safety of UgenTec’s software were unsubstantiated.

The UK has agreed to settle a lawsuit over how it selected an IT contract for coronavirus testing at its Lighthouse labs.

The BBC understands that the settlement will cost the government up to £2m.

British company Diagnostics AI claimed it lost out to a European rival UgenTec despite spotting some positive coronavirus cases its rival missed.

It sued the government over the decision, claiming the selection process was “unfair and unlawful”.

Lighthouse labs are a UK-wide network of specialist coronavirus laboratories managed by the government and run by private firms. When the labs were set up, companies pitched to analyse the test results.

The dispute was due to be played out in court. It would have meant a public examination of the accuracy and speed of the testing system, at a time when it has come under serious criticism.

But the government has decided to settle the case and will pay Diagnostics AI compensation and most of its legal fees.

However, despite agreeing to the payout, the government has refuted the claims made by Diagnostics AI, saying they are “inaccurate”.

“The tests are reliable and effective, the laboratories that undertake them have been reviewed and assessed by experts and the percentage of false negatives or positives is tiny,” said a Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson.

“This was a commercial dispute over a software contract where a number of factors were considered before it was awarded, which is still subject to final agreement over costs.”

As the contract was worth more than £1m, the BBC understands the settlement including legal costs could amount to around £2m.

Dispute over contract decision

Swabs are taken from people at testing sites or home tests and treated with a chemical process that produces a graph. The software is used to determine whether the graphs show the sample was positive or negative for coronavirus. Image copyright WPA Pool Image caption Software is used to analyse swabs to determine whether a sample is positive or negative for coronavirus

Diagnostics AI claimed UgenTec’s analysis of a trial run of 2,000 samples was flawed. In some cases, it claimed UgenTec found negative coronavirus results, when the results were actually positive or inconclusive.

“The system that they ultimately went with and decided to pay for missed around 50 out of 800 positive [results], so that’s around one in 15, or so, one in 16 – to be precise – positives,” Diagnostics AI’s chief executive Aron Cohen told the BBC.

“Obviously when that translates to hundreds of thousands of samples a day, that’s potentially thousands of missed positives going out every day. So that was really worrying for us.”

UgenTec in return claimed that no patients were affected at all as it was a trial run.

“We provide crucial covid interpretation services to the Lighthouse Labs to help them manage the vast amounts of data they generate. These claims are inaccurate and misleading,” UgenTec’s chief executive Steven Verhoeven told the BBC.

“None of these samples refer to actual results given to patients or the public and to imply any public health impact is wrong. Live tests were not being supported by our software at the time which was in the process of being implemented. As illustrated by independent tests, we have every confidence in our software and the services we provide.”

‘A commercial dispute’

Two non-profit companies owned and funded by the government were also sued by Diagnostics AI – namely UK Biocentre and Medicines Delivery Catapult (MDC), which ran the process to decide which company to use.

Court papers show that between 31 March and 14 April, Diagnostics AI repeatedly requested information about exactly what services were required and how their bid would be evaluated.

Diagnostics AI say it never received the information it asked for. This is refuted by UK Biocentre, which says both providers were given the same information. Image copyright NurPhoto Image caption Local authorities are permitted to purchase services without engaging in a competitive process if there is a significant risk to life

When the two bids were being considered in early April, the UK was facing what Boris Johnson had called a “moment of national emergency”.

In such urgent circumstances, the law does make provision for the government to buy services without a competitive process, if certain conditions are met.

However, it is understood that both Diagnostics AI and Ugentec had been recommended to UK Biocentre, and so a decision was made to evaluate both offers.

Diagnostics AI says this process was unfair and flawed, but UK Biocentre insists it was fair to both bidders.

A spokesperson for UK Biocentre said: “The allegations are groundless; this was a commercial dispute. The software in question is being used widely in the Lighthouse Laboratories, in some NHS laboratories and abroad.

“External quality assurance has confirmed that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in the Lighthouse Laboratories, of which the automated diagnostic software forms part, is performing well.”

A spokesperson for MDC also provided the BBC with a statement: “The full results of evaluation identified UgenTec as a safe and quality provider, able to deliver in high volumes, and with a comprehensive support system in place. It has performed superbly over the past six months, analysing over eight million test results for the nation. The litigation was purely a commercial dispute.”

The BBC understands that investigations were carried out into the claims made by Diagnostics AI, but concluded that concerns over the safety of UgenTec’s software were unsubstantiated.

However Mr Cohen disagrees: “The government is paying out a lot of money. And they’re paying this out, you know, to avoid it at least in part, to avoid having to have these issues aired in court, and to have discussions over the accuracy of the testing.”

SOURCE: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54455666

VIA: http://markcrispinmiller.com/2020/10/uk-settles-lawsuit-to-make-sure-the-corruption-of-its-covid-testing-doesnt-come-to-light-at-trial/

Image by Paweł Szymczuk from Pixabay

Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay


A NZ man is walking 525 kms to Parliament raising awareness of what’s been termed the’worst abortion law in the world’

“Did you know … that before 20 weeks you can now terminate a pregnancy for any reason – even if you were carrying a boy but wanted a girl? Did you know that you can get a termination right up to birth, as long as the provider thinks it’s “appropriate”? Or that if a baby is born alive during the attempted procedure, it can be left to die?”

From Little Pink Casket Facebook page:

“One man. One little pink casket. More than 500km. Peter van Zweeden is walking the 525km from Tauranga to Parliament, Wellington, with a little pink casket strapped to his back. The kind you’d see at an infant’s funeral. Why? To raise awareness about a major change in New Zealand’s healthcare law.

In March, just prior to Level 4 lockdown, the Government voted on an important piece of legislation. Most of us were understandably focused on other things at that time, and the new law passed largely unnoticed. But many people are surprised when they find out what it means. Did you know, for example, that before 20 weeks you can now terminate a pregnancy for any reason – even if you were carrying a boy but wanted a girl? Did you know that you can get a termination right up to birth, as long as the provider thinks it’s “appropriate”? Or that if a baby is born alive during the attempted procedure, it can be left to die? If this information interests or disturbs you, even a little bit, then follow us. Follow Peter’s journey – and join us in the hope for change.”

RELATED:

Actor Jim Caviezel calls out the ‘barbarism of abortion’

NZ’s law was recently dubbed ‘worst in the world’ at an Australian website called ‘Ministry Now’. To watch the video go to this link.

Abortion procedures… a video from a gynecologist who ceased performing abortions.

Planned Parenthood Admits in Court That It Sold Body Parts From Aborted Babies

From lifenews.com

The preliminary hearing for undercover journalist David Daleiden began Tuesday in California with Planned Parenthood admitting that it harvested aborted babies’ body parts and supplied them to human tissue procurement companies, according to the Center for Medical Progress.

Daleiden and Sandra Merritt face 15 felony charges for invasion of privacy because they exposed the abortion chain’s gruesome baby body parts trade. Tuesday began a nine-day preliminary hearing about whether the case should go to trial, Courthouse News reports.

“This preliminary stage is the put-up-or-shut-up stage,” Merritt’s attorney Nicolaie Cocis told the news outlet. “What today has revealed is the prosecution by the attorney general is political in nature and built on a house of cards.”

Daleiden’s and Merritt’s lawyers believe their prosecution is politically motivated by politicians like California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Kamala Harris, who received huge campaign donations from the abortion industry. No other journalists have been prosecuted for similar undercover investigations under California law, they contend.

On Tuesday, several abortion industry workers testified, including Melissa Fowler, the vice president of the National Abortion Federation (NAF). Daleiden and Merritt recorded some of their undercover footage at an NAF conference.

“Planned Parenthood abortion providers appeared under oath in court today and admitted supplying the body parts of children in the womb to for-profit brokers like StemExpress,” Daleiden said in a statement. “Meanwhile, the Vice President of the National Abortion Federation denied any knowledge of the gruesome trafficking in fetal body parts, despite hosting StemExpress as a major vendor at the trade shows.”

READ MORE

LINK: https://www.lifenews.com/2019/09/04/planned-parenthood-admits-in-court-that-it-sold-body-parts-from-aborted-babies/

Photo: lifenews.com

Must Watch! Legal Non Consent Forms: Solutions Empowerment

From uncensored.co.nz

All the hard work is done for you on this site, Solutions Empowerment, and it’s made so simple!

From Rose at the ConTrail

AND they are bringing out the same process for 5G! 

You can also learn how to respond to the police at this website.  It is a genuine legal site that has been operating successfully for many years.. You do not have to join the site but a small koha ($5) is asked for to cover the work.  For a legal filing, this is a token.  I have joined the site and will be keeping a close eye on the legalities.

READ MORE:

Video  https://youtu.be/9k3a1AT9t8U

Source documents  https://solutionsempowerment.com/nonconsent1

Many blessings to the amazing activists working with Sue Grey in Nelson.

https://uncensored.co.nz/2020/06/11/must-watch-legal-non-consent-forms-solutions-empowerment/

Image by Free-Photos from Pixabay

LEAKED: Crown Law Advice to Police… Government and Police Acted Illegally

From thebfd.co.nz

On Monday we published emails leaked to us that showed that the Police had sought and obtained a Crown Law legal opinion on precisely what they could and could not do under the Governments pandemic lockdown edicts.

The emails showed that Police believed, on the advice from Crown Law that there was very little they could do, other than ask people nicely to comply with the edicts.

We have now been leaked the Crown Law advice that Attorney General David Parker, Police Commissioner Andy Coster and former Police Commissioner Mike Bush all refused to release to the public, nor to the Epidemic Response Committee chaired by Simon Bridges.

That advice shows that definitely for the first nine days of the lockdown, the Police and the Government acted ultra vires, acting or done beyond one’s legal power or authority.

The letter dated 27 March 2020, sent to Bill Peoples – Police National Manager – Legal Services from Bronagh McKenna the Crown Counsel is explicit in its advice regarding enforcement of the lockdown. [The Crown Law reference for those wanting to OIA is POL055/2475]

READ MORE

https://thebfd.co.nz/2020/05/07/leaked-crown-law-advice-to-police/

When the “Cure” is more disruptive than the Virus … is our government acting lawfully, or has it over-reached?

from Sue Grey

The Epidemic Preparedness Act gives special powers to the Prime Minister when she is satisfied that the effects of an outbreak of a stated quarantinable disease (within the meaning of the Health Act 1956) are likely to disrupt or continue to disrupt essential governmental and business activity in New Zealand (or stated parts of New Zealand) significantly.”

The irony, says Sue Grey, Co-leader of the NZ Outdoors Party and public rights lawyer, is that almost all of the disruption so far is from the government response, rather than from the virus.

https://www.outdoorsparty.co.nz/

How far can the government lawfully go?

This week’s further extension of Covid-19 level 4 restrictions by the NZ government has frustrated small businesses, families, patients waiting for medical treatment, outdoors people and constitutional lawyers alike.

Is our government acting lawfully, or has it over-reached? Has it acted on sound if shifting evidence, or has it been bamboozeled by media hype, and overreacted?

Is this massive social experiment in the best interests of the public of New Zealand, or has it been diverted by those with other agendas? Has the focus on “spreading the curve” and more recently on “eliminating” COVID-19 been proportionate to the original risk? Has the cure created more harm than the original risk, due to the social and economic effects, and the loss of our once cherished rights and freedoms?

Epidemic Preparedness Act

The government relies on three laws: A) The Epidemic Preparedness Act, B) Special powers in Part 3 of the Health Act; and C) the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act.

A: The Epidemic Preparedness Act

The Epidemic Preparedness Act at section 5, gives special powers to the Prime Minister: “With the agreement of the Minister of Health, the Prime Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare that he or she is satisfied that the effects of an outbreak of a stated quarantinable disease (within the meaning of the Health Act 1956) are likely to disrupt or continue to disrupt essential governmental and business activity in New Zealand (or stated parts of New Zealand) significantly.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/0085/latest/whole.html#DLM404465

Covid 19 was notified as a quarantinable disease on 11 March 2020. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2020/0031/latest/whole.html

Just eight days later, on 18 March 2020, Covid-19 was de-classified by the UK authorities. This meant it was no longer regarded a highly infectious disease.

Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.

The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.”

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid

The evidence is that while Covid-19 has triggered an extreme level of media interest, the death rate from the Covid, (at around 0.1%), is significantly less than the 1-10% that was first estimated.

Further, the overall death rate in Europe this season is similar to the death rate over the last five years. It appears that many deaths are being reported as deaths “from” Covid, when in other years they would be reported as heart attacks or pneumonia. The statistics confuse death “with” covid and death “from” covid.

COVID-19 has reportedly killed 14 New Zealanders over the last six weeks or so. The annual death rate in New Zealand is approximately 35,000 or close to 100 people per day. There is an average of one death from heart disease every 90 minutes (an average of 16 per day). Covid-19 is responsible for only about 0.3% of the NZ deaths in this time frame.

Most of the COVID deaths were elderly and suffering from pre-existing medical conditions. In at least one case, the family has publicly challenged Covid being reported as the cause of death, reporting their father/grandfather died at home from a heart attack, which was falsely reported as a Covid death.

An Epidemiclikely to disrupt essential government and business activity”

Curiously the legal criteria for triggering the Epidemic Preparedness Act is not the severity of a disease, but “the effects being likely to disrupt essential government and business activity”.

READ MORE

http://suegrey.co.nz/index.php/2020/04/23/when-the-cure-is-more-disruptive-than-the-virus/?fbclid=IwAR0_bMXYghlDozDjbBm6v02g3jwQ8Y-0RyDgk7aLy2suavC-xr_lKyUDrlw

 

Image by herbinisaac from Pixabay

Vaccination Without Parental Knowledge Kills 14-year-old-girl

June 2, 2019 — Canada already has a law allowing children to be vaccinated without parental knowledge or consent, and that law has killed at least one young healthy girl. Her name was Annabel Morin. She was vaccinated in school and 16 days later had a severe adverse reaction but no one connected it to the vaccination. Her mother had no clue her daughter had been recently vaccinated. After she recovered and returned to school – despite the fact that Annabel told her school about her emergency room visit – the school vaccinated her again failing to connect the adverse reaction to the dangerous Gardasil vaccine. She died 15 days after her second dose of Gardasil. Her mother Linda had no knowledge when the vaccinations were given, which is perfectly legal in Canada. Read more about this at the following links:

http://www.offtheradar.co.nz/index.php/vaccines/201-gardasil-and-linda-morin-fighting-the-silence

ttps://sanevax.org/gone-after-gardasil-annabelle-canada/

READ MORE

https://thefedupdemocrat.home.blog/2019/06/02/vaccination-without-parental-knowledge-kills-14-year-old-girl/?fbclid=IwAR2OPhKHYXVCoa4ubatMrwTO-9PBHi0Mb2AXBU1RBIhegHDx8kcpoJmO3ac

DoC’s lawyers ask the judge that their scientist not be questioned in the Hunua Ranges 1080 drop case

A wee ‘small’ reminder of the honesty of the plebs who run the NZ corporation …

Remember this post on social media? September just gone? QUOTE: 

“I was there last week
Doc wouldn’t let our lawyer cross examine their scientists and court allowed that. Lawyer won hands down against doc
They couldn’t prove 1080 safety…..TOTAL CORRUPTION
Our lawyer proved by DoC’s own files they were lying …but we LOST”

NOTE: SINCE THIS POSTED, I’VE HEARD THE DROP IS NOT GOING AHEAD AT THIS STAGE. STILL IN COURT…. (PS 19/1/2019 … it DID of course go ahead).

Why do they not want their scientist cross examined? Couldn’t stand the heat? Don’t have the back up science for their data? Could be anybody’s guess but certainly not rocket science. Whatever side of the fence you sit on the 1080 issue, this is about justice of which there appears to be very little these days, remembering Graeme Sturgeon for instance & his ‘win’ that left him with $23K court costs. Looking from afar here we are being sent a very clear message which I’m sure you can figure out for yourselves.

41676320_625646767829627_4412680830481072128_n.jpg

Further comment from Facebook today:

“I was there last week
DoC wouldn’t let our lawyer cross examine their scientists and court allowed that. Lawyer won hands down against DoC
They couldn’t prove 1080 safety…..TOTAL CORRUPTION
Our lawyer proved by DoC’s own files they were lying …but we LOST”

CE email vetting may fall foul of Privacy Act reports mainstream

As the ‘debate’ rages on social media about the perceived rights and wrongs of interfering in email communications without the participants’ knowledge, the privacy commissioner has commented. The CE in question has claimed he’s done nothing legally wrong as the Council own the emails. Have a read. There are many articles from mainstream now calling the CE’s actions into question as the issue gets too big to sweep under the rug as they generally tend to do. Whistle blowers have uncovered a variety of questionable issues with the HDC in recent months & years with little outrage from folk least of all mainstream. In fact I’ve noticed they take the side of the establishment, ever so subtly. Here’s hoping there will be a forensic audit on this, and that the report that highlighted this issue be released to the public in the meantime. Once tabled at a council meeting it is then open for the public to read. Unfortunately six Councillors advised they wouldn’t be at Wednesday’s meeting so with no quorum it was postponed. It would have been tabled there I believe. It becomes harder and harder to defend this council in any way, well those who hold the power of vote that is. In the meantime there’s the usual hate fest going on against the perceived whistleblower, except this time the newspaper in question has publicly stated the mayor did not leak the information to them.
EnvirowatchHorowhenua

 

From Horowhenua Chronicle

computer-1844996_1280

By Adam Shelton

Horowhenua District Council chief executive David Clapperton’s view, as reported this week, on email privacy and ownership is misconceived, says the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.

Mr Clapperton, commenting earlier this week on the controversy surrounding his interception of other people’s emails, said he had not breached privacy in any way in his communications practices.

“Emails addressed to an @horowhenua.govt.nz email address are the property of the Horowhenua District Council as is outlined in the electronic communication policy,” he said.

READ MORE

 

“NZ Has One of The World’s Most Corrupt Judiciaries” – from a Barrister

From http://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com http://www.TheVinnyEastwoodShow.com/14/post/2017/05/nz-has-the-worlds-most-corrupt-judiciary-tatsuhiko-koyama.html#ixzz4j5E2RGyF
http://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com

Tatsuhiko Koyama www.facebook.com/Tatsuhiko.koyama.3
“Court fraud is a lot more common than you might think, and it is a terrifying prospect that you can be bankrupted without even seeing a day in court or even having a judges signature.
New Zealand’s judiciary is one of if not the most corrupt legal system in the developed world, it is essentially an organised crime protection racket.”

[Visit the link to hear the audio and/or watch the video of the interview]

Header Photo Credit: NZ Supreme Court Wikipedia

CDC Blocks Testimony by Vaccine Whistleblower in Medical Malpractice Case

hammer-719066_1280

Thomas Frieden, the director of the Center for Disease Control (CDC), has blocked CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, from testifying on scientific fraud and destruction of evidence by senior CDC officials in critical vaccine safety studies regarding the causative relationship between childhood vaccines and autism.

Attorneys Bryan Smith and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of Morgan & Morgan, have been seeking to have Dr. Thompson testify in a medical malpractice case to explain how the CDC committed scientific fraud in a series of studies, which found no link between vaccines and autism.

In denying the request, Dr. Frieden said, “Dr. William Thompson’s deposition testimony would not substantially promote the objectives of CDC or HHS [Health and Human Services].”

Dr. Thompson, a 19-year veteran at the CDC and former senior vaccine safety scientist at the agency’s Immunology Safety Office, is the co-author of four key studies that the CDC widely touts to exonerate the MMR vaccine and vaccines containing the mercury-based preservative thimerosal, from being linked to autism. Thompson is currently employed at the CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.

syringe-417786_1280

In August 2014, Dr. Thompson revealed that the data underlying CDC’s principle vaccine safety studies demonstrated a causal link between vaccines and autism or autism symptoms, despite CDC’s claims to the contrary. According to Thompson, based upon interpretation of the data, “There is biologic plausibility right now to say that thimerosal causes autism-like features.” Dr. Thompson invoked federal whistleblower protection in August 2014.

READ MORE

http://www.ecowatch.com/cdc-vaccines-autism-2051536402.html?xrs=RebelMouse_fb