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.
Something to have printed on a laminated card, for your wallet, or however
you might want to carry it. From human rights lawyer Francis Boyle:
By authority of the Nuremberg Code on Medical Experimentation, I do hereby exercise my right to refuse to submit to or to administer the Covid-19 vaccine. The United States Government has prosecuted, convicted and executed Medical Doctors who have violated the Nuremberg Code on Medical Experimentation. Aiders and abettors of Nuremberg Crimes are equally guilty and have also been prosecuted, convicted, and executed.
Francis A. Boyle
Hers is how the fear porn writes it
Kansas nurses refuse to give COVID-19 vaccines
For those of us who believe vaccines to be unsafe and not properly tested, news coming out that plans are underway to mandate vaccination for COVID-19 is troubling.
Bill Gates, a man who everyone knows has the biggest financial stake in all this, has said that we won’t go back to normal until a vaccine has gotten out to the entire world.
Many world leaders are ready to follow Gates’ playbook, like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who stated, “Normality as it was before will not come back full-on until we get a vaccine for this.”
And now some officials on the ground, those who are directing the logistics of a vaccine rollout, are telling us how imminent these plans may be. Let’s listen to the words of Dr. Allison Arwady, the head of Chicago’s Public Health Department, who tells us “We’ve already bought the syringes, we already know where it’s going to happen…”:
This article here is likely in order to persuade you to take the coming untested vaccine just in case you’re having second thoughts. My previous post about violations of the Nuremberg code got ‘fact checked’ as false info … I don’t buy it. Arguing over is it or isn’t it in violation is besides the point. What the fact checkers say is it is only in violation of experimental ethics, not in the case of a safe vaccine. Well one could easily make a case for this being experimental in that the vaccine has been inadequately tested. They have by passed animal testing. We appear in this case to be the said guinea pigs. People must be allowed to decline consent for any medical procedure … for any treatment of their bodies particularly in the case of untested interventions that have not been proven 100% safe. If this vaccine is safe enough as touted, why have the Pharmaceutical companies been given immunity from prosecution for damages? The propaganda piece below is simply to persuade you it’s all safe.
What the public want is reassurance these people do not plan to make it mandatory. EWR
Medical ethics and legal experts said the principles, named after the Nuremberg trials, are compatible with vaccination.
Facebook and Instagram posts shared thousands of times claim that vaccines directly violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation established after World War II. This claim is false; medical ethics and legal experts said the principles, named after the Nuremberg trials, are compatible with vaccination. “Vaccines are in direct violation of the Nuremberg Code,” a flyer photographed and shared on Facebook in Canada on May 25, 2020 warns.
Photo: Wikipedia By Raymond D’Addario – https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa7388, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1192341
Information posted at Facebook by Prof Nigel Anthony Gray
What Is the Nuremberg Code?
When World War II ended in 1945, the victorious Allied powers enacted the International Military Tribunal on November 19th, 1945. As part of the Tribunal, a series of trials were held against major war criminals and Nazi sympathizers holding leadership positions in political, military, and economic areas. The first trial conducted under the Nuremberg Military Tribunals in 1947 became known as The Doctors’ Trial, in which 23 physicians from the German Nazi Party were tried for crimes against humanity for the atrocious experiments they carried out on unwilling prisoners of war. Many of the grotesque medical experiments took place at the Auschwitz concentration camp, where Jewish prisoners were tattooed with dehumanizing numbers onto their arms; numbers that would later be used to identify their bodies after death.The Doctors’ Trial is officially titled “The United States of America v. Karl Brandt, et al.,” and it was conducted at the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany. The trial was conducted here because this was one of the few largely undamaged buildings that remained intact from extensive Allied bombing during the war. It is also said to have been symbolically chosen because it was the ceremonial birthplace of the Nazi Party. Of the 23 defendants, 16 were found guilty, of which seven received death sentences and nine received prison sentences ranging from 10 years to life imprisonment. The other 7 defendants were acquitted.The verdict also resulted in the creation of the Nuremberg Code, a set of ten ethical principles for human experimentation.
What Are The Nuremberg Code’s Ethical Guidelines For Research?
The Nuremberg Code aimed to protect human subjects from enduring the kind of cruelty and exploitation the prisoners endured at concentration camps. The 10 elements of the code are:
- Voluntary consent is essential
- The results of any experiment must be for the greater good of society
- Human experiments should be based on previous animal experimentation
- Experiments should be conducted by avoiding physical/mental suffering and injury
- No experiments should be conducted if it is believed to cause death/disability
- The risks should never exceed the benefits
- Adequate facilities should be used to protect subjects
- Experiments should be conducted only by qualified scientists
- Subjects should be able to end their participation at any time
- The scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment when injury, disability, or death is likely to occur