Taking Back the Reins

Hospital Administrators, Servants of Darkness?

Deplorable Patriot requested that we archive this discussion.

It started to look like we could do more, that we could turn this into actionable measures when Aubergine responded to the draconian measures by hospitals to block needed treatment of patients if they will not bend the knee to the shot doctors by making suggestions of ways to go local.

Hospital’s Boot On Faces Of Patients

Here are the two cases highlighted:

Colorado Kidney Patient Denied Transplant Due to Vaccine Status – Both Willing Donor and Patient Unvaccinated, Hospital Refuses Surgery

Sundance 

I am finding this to have crossed some kind of line. I’m not sure what, but it is EVIL of a grave and serious nature. This is something that cannot be accepted in America.

Wolf Moon

I had found the happened in Washington state a couple months ago.
I mm not sure why this one in Colorado is the one getting more attention.

“The University of Washington Medical Center denied organ transplants to patients who refuse a COVID vaccine as early as June 2021. And hospital officials refuse to answer basic questions about their policy.

In fact, they won’t even directly acknowledge they have a policy.

The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH has learned that UW Medicine removed a 64-year-old patient from the transplant waitlist. He says he was on the list for two and a half years. The hospital made the decision after they learned the patient refused to be vaccinated against COVID. They said they would consider adding him back to the waitlist should he satisfy their “compliance concerns.”

Last week, one vaccine-hesitant patient came forward. He says he was told the vaccine was mandatory before he could get a necessary liver transplant. The hospital does not deny any of the allegations.”

There’s a photo of this patients letter in the article.

gil00

Allen says he wrote a letter to UW Medicine to express his disappointment with the decision. He shared the letter with the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH.

“I understand that my choices have repercussions but I did not change the policy. I am most put off, not by your decision to remove me from the list, thereby removing any opportunity to live out my life at a near-normal level, but by the lack of scientific logic that dictates your ‘policy,’” he wrote.

He points to the side effects associated with the vaccine as why he did not want to get it.

“As a person who has spent much time and money at UWMC as a heart failure patient, I am being told I cannot get care for my condition unless I take an injection that has shown to cause cardiac problems,” he wrote. “It seems that a wise choice would be to not make a panic move and run to get injected with the experimental gene therapy until more is known.”

On Aug. 10, Allen received a response.

Bo Secord, assistant director of patient relations, said they received his letter and that it was shared with “appropriate leadership.” But they weren’t budging.

“As your provider noted, they are happy to re-evaluate should you change your mind,” Secord wrote.

gil00

We Must Act

These comments seem like a good kickoff to a discussion of how to deal with this on the local level. We will not be innocent of their blood if we see this and do nothing.

So, a plan maybe?

We all have local hospitals. Write a letter to the administration of your closest hospital denouncing this action, and stating your opposition to any such. State your intention to take anything that happens like this in your community as a violation of the Hippocratic Oath, and of global medicine expectations. Let them know that citizens WILL hold them accountable for their actions, in any way available to us, including lawsuits. Tell them you will make them infamous if they participate in this type of patient neglect.

Should we do that?

Aubergine

At ALL levels, we need to begin talking about what the Vaxzis have done to medicine.

We must openly disrespect Vaxzi doctors, nurses, and medical administrators.

Wolf Moon

A letter won’t get the job done. It will take public exposure that causes public outrage, humiliation, lawsuits, and fear of consequences. Unfortunately, the medical establishment seems to be all in with this tyranny, so we have to fight with all our might. We need to get local news coverage, to call accrediting boards, and other actions that will cause trouble for those in power and get their immediate attention. A large group of people entering the hospital and not budging until an administrator talks with them would be a good start, with the news media on the way. This cannot stand.

TheseTruths

Short answer, IMO, is “Yes!”

I think the main point is FIRST to REQUIRE that receipt of any such notice is legally enforceable – two ways to do this are either to use a “fax” (does anyone still have this tech? – I’ve read that it completes legal delivery), or to use a return-receipt mailing for documented proof, with signature, of receipt.

Next, one must INCLUDE this info in the missive itself. Meaning, that one puts the receiver on notice that they are legally required, in their official capacity, to be responsible for the information contained therein.

The same works for hand-to-hand delivery to school boards and election boards: give NO QUARTER to them for having / possessing / being LIABLE FOR RECEIVING the material sent. No excuses!

It’s a better idea to remind them of this duty, than to enumerate or otherwise hypothesize any consequences. The consequences are THERE – they needn’t be explicitly stated. Was it Kareem Abdul-Jabbar who said (paraphrase) “Men DO. Children threaten to do.” There isn’t any need to vent!

But you’re right, in that the Hippocratic Oath, the Geneva Convention, and the Nuremberg Code MUST all be cited – hopefully in full, to the extent possible – in the communication.

FG&C posted the HO; we haven’t yet a direct quote from the GC (haven’t seen Gail for a minute! – hope she’s ok – someone else?); and the NC has been directly cited here, a few weeks ago. I think these should be included as attachments, so as not to interrupt the main body of the letter / fax, et al.

I would also add that sending just to a single med-facility first, and then afterward to others, gives them too much time (they talk to each other!) to shut down receipt.

So, don’t do it sequentially – one after the other – but instead do it in parallel – all at once! Follow the “I caught ’em all!” approach!

Pick a few counties (including the county in which the State Capitol is situated), check the biggest hospitals et al., and do what you are able and willing to do.

Last – be COLD! Professional-grade writing – nothing for lawyers to trip you up on. Avoid saying what you WILL, or WANT, to do. Simply complete the task at hand.

Sound good? I hope so …

Cheers, Aubergine!

EmeraldStar

It’s worth remembering that part of the Geneva Convention requires opposing armies to treat the sick and wounded of their enemy, and failure to do so is considered a war crime and crime against humanity.

ForGodandCountry

This should be on billboards across the world …

wowohwow1528

YES! And even the NAZIS obeyed SOME of the early Geneva Convention principles, and FEARED being caught violating others.

Wolf Moon

If I may …. The line crossed here is this is a gross, reprehensible violation of the hippocratic oath.

It is…

One of the oldest binding documents in history, the Oath written by Hippocrates is still held sacred by physicians: to treat the ill to the best of one’s ability, to preserve a patient’s privacy, to teach the secrets of medicine to the next generation

A Modern Version of the Hippocratic Oath is…(highlights mine)….

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant: I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow. I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism. I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon’s knife or the chemist’s drug. I will not be ashamed to say “I know not,” nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient’s recovery. I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God. I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person’s family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick. I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure. I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm. If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

https://www.medicinenet.com/hippocratic_oath/definition.htm

Put simply, these are medical “professionals” who are denying known, necessary medical care to those in need for entirely unjustifiable reasons…and said denial may well result in the PREVENTABLE DEATH of those being denied said medical care.

Hell, even mortal enemies at war treat one another’s sick and wounded!!

The people responsible for this are traitors to their oath, their profession, and to humanity itself.

This is literally a crime against humanity.

And let’s be perfectly clear…. This isn’t about medicine, or medical risk. This is about politics. These are vax’d liberals who view ANYONE who is unvax’d as a “Trump supporter”. In these people’s minds, ”vax hesitant” = “anti-vax” = “Trump supporter”

In short, medical “professionals” denying known, necessary medical care to those in need may well be committing murder. Literally.

ForGodandCountry

Hospital’s Boot On Face Of Doctors

And there is another area where hospital administrators are putting their boots on the faces of the people.

They don’t call it firing so the hospital is off the hook for wrongful termination or unemployment. They call it “voluntarily resignation.” The hospital where my husband works is CLEVERLY wording it. He received a religious exception, BUT has three choices for their “accommodation:” 1. Unpaid leave, no benefits. He would still an employee, but no title and they WON’T hold his job; 2. He can apply for a new remote position at the hospital. That of which he’s qualified for none of these and the pay is 1/2 of his. Or 3: Voluntarily resign. If he doesn’t submit a choice, they will “voluntarily resign” him. They’re laying the spider web to trap him.

Gab, @FactChecker_01

The Nuremburg Code

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the
experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible.

During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

The Nuremburg Code

The Geneva Convention

The full text PDF of The Geneva Convention of 1949 (there were follow-on treaties) provided by in a 224 page document by the ICRC. This might be the relevant section, starting on page 65.

GENEVA CONVENTION
FOR THE AMELIORATION OF THE CONDITION OF WOUNDED , SICK AND
SHIPWRECKED MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES AT SEA OF 12 AUGUST 1949

The undersigned Plenipotentiaries of the Governments represented at the Diplomatic
Conference held at Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949, for the purpose of revising the
Xth Hague Convention of October 18, 1907 for the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the
Principles of the Geneva Convention of 1906, have agreed as follows:

CHAPTER I
General Provisions

:

Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
b) taking of hostages;
c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
2) The wounded, sick and shipwrecked shall be collected and cared for.

The Geneva Convention of 1949

Who’s Ready To Get To Work?

This is a team effort. Who is ready to pitch in and draft letters.

Letters to hospitals, letters to doctors, letters to our County Sheriff, letters to County Supervisors, letters to editors, where else?

35 thoughts on “Taking Back the Reins

    1. Hunt4Truth
      @Hunt4Truth
      ·
      1h
      print this out and leave it on friends coffee tables ( I have found this is the best way to get somebody to read and it’s ready to read an entire document rather than send them a link the malik because it will sit around their house and they’ll glance at it.

      https://magainstitute.com/blockbuster-leaked-dod-stamped-document-confirms-multiple-lies-about-numbers-of-vaccinated-deaths-and-hospitalizations/

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Here is a draft letter. Please comment, change, suggest, etc. I am a writer perfectly accustomed to be edited!

    Dear Hospital Administrator (NAME),

    I am writing to you due to disturbing news circulating in the medical community wherein patients are being denied life-saving care based on their Covid-19 vaccination status by some hospitals. This is a terrifying and disturbing action by medical facilities.

    The Hippocratic Oath signed by medical professionals reads in part:

    “I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant: I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow. I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.”

    An organ transplant to save a person’s life would be an excellent example of a “measure…required” for the benefit of the sick, would you not agree? And yet, there are currently hospitals refusing transplants to patients who have, in consultation with their doctors, their conscience, and in some cases, their God, decided that they will not take the current Covid-19 vaccine.

    The Nuremburg Code signed into existence after a World War in part provoked by some of the greatest medical atrocities in history, states:

    “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

    This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.”

    Can it be considered “voluntary consent” when the pressure brought to bear to take the vaccine includes the threat of not receiving a medical treatment necessary to live? Is it not “force” or “duress” to present a patient with the Hobson’s choice of vaccination against one’s will or death from lack of care?

    According to the Geneva Convention, even armies at war are required to medically treat sick or wounded enemies:

    Article 3
    In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

    1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

    2) The wounded, sick and shipwrecked shall be collected and cared for.

    Are our hospitals to be required to do less for us than an enemy army is expected to do? Are we to suffer and die, treated as the grossest violators of the Geneva Convention are wont to treat their enemies?

    We are in extraordinarily contentious times as humans, but it is incumbent on you, as a leader of a hospital, to put aside conflict and enmity and instead embrace the oaths your medical personnel took, the codes of acceptable medical treatment, and the basic humanity required of those who would take on the most sacred task of treating and healing the sick. I am writing this letter in hopes that it resonates and that I will never see the name of your hospital in the news in such a tragic and horrifying manner as some are now being seen. Refusing treatment of people who have made a thoughtful medical decision for themselves is criminal. The Nuremburg Code was not in force when the actions that precipitated it occurred, but the people who committed the heinous wrongs it sought to right and prevent from ever happening again were prosecuted for their actions just the same. Let us all seek to never have such trials happen again.

    Sincerely,
    ME

    Liked by 10 people

            1. Well, if you want to submit them ALL using the trusty bin-catch phrase PRIVATE MESSAGE TO WOLF (underscores instead of spaces) they will all go into the bin, and then I can turn them into a post. You can do it on either site, too.

              Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, EXCELLENT, Aubergine!

      I especially like the way you ended it:

      “Let us all seek to never have such trials happen again.”

      Hah!
      Nice little veiled threat there…very nice.

      Liked by 6 people

  2. Posted this on the main thread and came back and saw your post. Seems it should be here too as your proposing a call to action. First action I’d love to wipe the smugness’ of the face of some these commentators below the tweet. Hero’s since the start of the pandemic are being treated so rudely.

    Not the exact sauce, but yes, seems they will likely adopt this when they meet on the 13th of this month. From this page you can see how this is DOJ driven. Also last line gives a glimmer of hope, but don’t count on it. https://www.oregon.gov/osbn/Pages/Temp_Rules.aspx

    Link in full.

    “Regarding the proposed temporary administrative rules scheduled for the October 13, 2021, OSBN board meeting:
    Recently, OHA has adopted rules requiring immunization or qualifying exception for healthcare workers, and the Governor has issued an Executive Order with that requirement for state employees. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) published rules regarding healthcare workers who are not in compliance with the requirement after October 18. Model rules for temporary adoption have been issued by the DOJ and the expectation is that all state healthcare regulatory boards adopt these rules to address concerns that healthcare workers are caring for clients and interacting with the public without vaccination for COVID-19 after the Governor’s deadline. The proposed temporary rules to be considered October 13 would add failure to comply with OHA COVID-19 rules to the list of behaviors/actions included under conduct derogatory to the standards of nursing.
    The purpose of all healthcare regulatory boards is public safety, not advocacy for a profession. The Oregon State Board of Nursing, like all Oregon healthcare regulatory boards, is a part of the Executive Branch.
    The adoption of temporary rules is a standard administrative procedure for emergent situations. Temporary rules are in force for 180 days. At that point, if needed, the rules can be made permanent through the public rule hearing process.
    The OSBN has jurisdiction only over the nurse’s license, not nurse/employer issues such as staffing numbers, facility policy disputes, or HR matters.
    The OSBN can only act on complaints it receives. If the Board doesn’t receive a complaint regarding a nurse’s practice, it cannot initiate an investigation. If it does receive a complaint, the OSBN can investigate only if it has the proper jurisdiction, authority, and information regarding a situation.
    Each investigation is conducted solely on its merits, on a case-by-case basis. Regarding the temporary rules mentioned above, the OSBN will follow its standard investigatory process.
    If a board does seek disciplinary action against a license, the licensee is afforded due process rights, including right to a hearing before any discipline is final. Rumors of the OSBN automatically revoking a person’s license on the Governor’s deadline have no basis in fact.”

    Adds this link, but haven’t checked it out yet. Appeared after I posted. May have more info on what’s happening and might hint at if there is a way to intervene.
    https://www.oregon.gov/OSBN/pages/index.aspx

    Liked by 7 people

  3. So much misery causing people. What the hospitals and medical profession is doing goes against God Christ and the Holy Spirit. They are committing a crime against humanity. The Nuremberg code cannot be implemented soon enough.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. What is interesting is that the fake fact-checkers have articles to convince the low information people that Nuremburg does NOT apply … which suggested they are worried about that possibility.

      Liked by 7 people

  4. A hopeful sign, but KP has some of the deepest pockets in the industry.

    Kaiser Permanente has mandated that all 217,000 employees must be vaccinated. America’s Frontline Doctors has filed a complaint in court against them.

    https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2/press_releases/aflds-filed-a-complaint-against-kaiser-permanente/

    San Diego, CA – Attorney John Howard and Davillier Law Group, with support from America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) filed a Complaint on Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Kaiser Permanente, one of the U.S.’s largest health care organizations. The lawsuit challenges Kaiser’s mandate that all 217,000 employees be vaccinated by September 30, 2021 or be placed on unpaid leave. Employees have until December 1, 2021 or they will be terminated. Over 4,000 employees have reached out to America’s Frontline Doctors for civil rights assistance.

    AFLDS has been outspoken that COVID vaccine mandates are both illegal as a matter of law and unsafe as a matter of science. They are illegal because the shots do not stop transmission of Delta and therefore are personal treatment choices only. They are unsafe because they cause the vaccinated to become super-spreaders with extremely high viral loads and because the vaccinated become more critically ill with a higher rate of hospitalization and death than the unvaccinated. In addition, there are far more effective and safer treatments used all over the world. For example, the nation of India has declared its largest state with 240 million population “Covid-free” with a very low vaccination rate but a very high ivermectin usage rate…

    Kaiser Permanente asserts that it is merely following CDC guidelines. The CDC does not have the authority to mandate that all individuals be vaccinated, which has left the opening for many organizations like Kaiser to threaten “no jab, no job.” But as the largest healthcare employer in the nation, Kaiser wields enormous power, and it turns out there is an incestuous relationship between Kaiser and the policy decision-makers who are supposed to be acting independently. The Complaint reveals that the CDC and FDA are working in lock-step with Kaiser to mandate vaccines…

    Kaiser’s mandate violates both the Constitution and California State law. The Complaint cites violations of the 14th Amendment both the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause, the California Constitution, Invasion of Privacy, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Breach of Security for Computerized Personal Information, and Intention Infliction of Emotional Distress. The Complaint alleges the mandate violates multiple inherent constitutional rights, including many rights that have been recognized by the Supreme Court as fundamental, rights to “life,” “property,” “liberty,” “bodily-integrity” and privacy-related rights.

    The Constitutional arguments utilizing Jacobson v. Massachusetts are addressed by Attorneys Howard and Wentz who distinguish Jacobson in two ways. First Jacobson applied a small one-time financial penalty but not a severe penalty such as unemployment or unemployability. And second, COVID has a 0.1% infection fatality rate (even lower now with Delta) which is not remotely similar to the 1905 Smallpox outbreak, which had a 33% death rate.

    Dr. Simone Gold, who is both a physician and attorney and the founder of the civil rights organization America’s Frontline Doctors, recognizes that “the Kaiser case is our Alamo. Powerful interests will continue to encroach on people’s liberties if we permit them to trample human rights and force shots for a virus to which most of the population is already immune and for which working-age Americans have a 99.98%+ survivability. In addition, Kaiser has acted extraordinarily shamefully. They have done much more than threaten unemployment. They have coordinated with the Federal and State governments to coerce workers through total and permanent industry unemployability.”

    Kaiser’s Answer is due on 11/07/21.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Actually one could equate taking the Jab with Russian Roulette. In both cases there are no upsides in regards to your health and both have the very real possibility of death as an outcome.

      Liked by 4 people

  5. Gail Combs

    2021·10·09 Joe Biden Didn’t Win Daily Thread

    October 9, 2021 18:32
    “There is no regulation to sue over.”

    Doesn’t matter, a worker can SUE if he is fired or forced to quit BECAUSE HE CAN NOT BE FORCED TO TAKE AN EXPERIMENTAL DRUG AS AN EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENT!!!

    Plague of Liars: Nuremberg Code Outlaws Forced Medical Procedures, Which INCLUDES Mandatory Vaccinations

    Some people might not be familiar with the verb “to dissemble”, but we all need to become familiar with it, because there is a lot of dissembling going on.

    It basically means to deliberately conceal something or obfuscate it, so that one’s attention is misdirected or deflected from whatever the Dissembler wishes to obscure. Like the truth. And in this case, the truth about the Nuremberg Code and the protection it provides us from accepting any forced medical procedure or therapy at all.

    Together with casting doubts and slander, dissembling is one of the chief tools in the propagandist toolbox.

    A few days ago, I wrote an article explaining that forced vaccinations are a violation of the Nuremberg Code. Note the word, “forced”. In fact, any forced medical procedure or therapy is against the Nuremberg Code.

    All medical procedures and therapies must have fully informed and freely given consent, to the greatest extent possible – which means that people who are conscious and able to decide things for themselves remain in control of their medical destiny.

    It’s only when you are in desperate straits and unconscious that medical professionals are allowed to step in and make decisions “for you”.

    This is all cut and dried and set in cement since the 1940s, but now we have people trying to dissemble it and water it down and reinterpret the Nuremberg Code as applying only to medical experimentation.

    It does not.

    The Code itself explains exactly what it applies to, and even though the cases giving rise to the Code arose from medical experiments in Concentration Camps and involved forced medical experimentation on unwilling subjects, the core of the Nuremberg Code rose to the occasion and outlawed all kinds of forced medical procedures and therapies. Not just experimental procedures.

    Any medical procedure or therapy that you don’t want to participate in, you have the full, free, and unprejudiced right to refuse. Period….

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s