Dr. Simone Gold Goes Nuclear to Protect our Military Against Mandatory Vaccinations – UPDATED WITH PRESS RELEASE FROM SIMONE

First Dr. Gold filed a case to stop forced vaccinations on military personnel who had already had Covid-19. Two Army Colonels gave her affidavits so powerful that she has expanded her case so that she is now seeking an injunction on forced Covid-19 vaccinations for ALL military personnel. Listen in and learn how Simone is protecting our military with this federal injunction. (How long do you think it is before we get it expanded to include all federal employees? I hope that before they bury me UNDER Guantanamo they let me finish this one up for them!)

This is unreal. Listen to what her whistleblowers have to say. I walk through it and provide links here. At least they have solved the riddle of why people are having adverse reactions: someone apparently stole some Pfizer and Moderna vaccines and did mass spectrometry, and discovered they contain “significant” amounts of known toxic not-fit-for-human-or-animal-use ingredients. That’s seems odd.

So give this 10 minutes of attention. And forward this to anyone you know in the military concerned about this issue. They need to reach out to the lawyers named herein.

America’s Frontline Doctors Support the Filing of a Preliminary Injunction to Halt Further Vaccinations for All Military Staff, Pilots, and COVID-Recovered

DENVER, CO. – Today America’s Frontline Doctors legal team filed a preliminary injunction in Federal District Court, before Judge Raymond P. Moore. This follows the filing and subsequent denial of a temporary restraining order submitted and ruled on nearly four weeks ago. The Injunction aims to immediately halt further COVID-19 vaccinations for all military personnel given the extraordinary findings of the Plaintiff’s expert witnesses in their sworn testimony.

The Preliminary Injunction Motion along with the Amended Complaint seeks to broadens the class of Plaintiffs to include DoD contractors and is based on the now-proven fact that Covid-recovered people have superior immunity to all other forms of treatment. The latest pleadings in the suit claim that Covid vaccines actually harm the Covid recovered rather than help them.

The evidence presented includes expert witness testimony from two military doctors and a well-credentialed professor of pathology that have found that both the Pfizer and Moderna Covid 19 vaccines contain a pathologic toxin (poison) commonly called PEG (polyethylene glycol). Each such vaccine lists either ALC 3015 (Pfizer) or SM-102 (Moderna) as key ingredients of the billions of nanoparticles in each dose. The Safety Data Sheets relating to these two primary ingredients are abundantly clear and demonstrate the ingredients’ toxicity and danger to human users. In fact, they caution that such ingredients are not for human or veterinarian use.

This revelation was so alarming to these doctors that one of the Plaintiff’s experts, Army Lieutenant Colonel Theresa Long M.D., who is the head Flight Surgeon at Fort Rucker and is responsible for health safety of Army air crews, made a halting declaration; in her expert opinion, all military flight crew who have received any of the biologic products (vaccines) should be grounded from flying until an MRI screening of their cardiovascular system is performed in order to rule out these life-threatening adverse reactions to the shots. 

To date, there have been no screenings for COVID-recovered people. “Mandates of those who have had COVID make no sense, and cause worse harm to our nation’s finest,” said lead litigator[TC1]  Dale Saran, who stands for protecting our military service personnel from unnecessary harms just as he did nearly 20 years ago in the Anthrax vaccine litigation over similar concerns.   

The preliminary injunction is the next step in the legal battle to protect our military. This filing is for the purpose of ceasing any further involuntary vaccinations, based on evidence of the associated adverse health events and risks that are becoming increasingly pervasive. Those side effects include life-threatening blood clots and myocarditis, pericarditis (inflammatory conditions of the heart). These adverse events are listed on the Pfizer/BioNTech’s own fact sheet and the evidence of this widespread harm, especially in younger persons, has become irrefutable.

“It’s not just flight crews negatively affected by this,” states Dr. Samuel Sigoloff, who is another Army doctor who reports seeing the harm of these injections to military personnel and DOD contractors. “People cannot believe that the manufacturers would knowingly put such a toxin into their product and test it on our entire population for the first time during these phase III clinical trials our country is participating in,” said Todd Callender, the attorney who brought the case. “It’s so incredulous that they would use the global population for these toxic experiments that we engaged a world-class pathologist, Dr. Ralph Grams, to run mass spectrometry on the ingredients to ensure this is so.”

Indeed, Dr. Grams provided sworn testimony that both the Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna Emergency Use only COVID “vaccines” contain substantial and significant amounts of these toxic ingredients. “It’s no wonder people are having debilitating allergic reactions to these shots,” said Dr. Grams. To prove the case, Dr. Ralph Grams used state of the art mass spectrometry laboratory equipment to make his findings. These key ingredients are known carcinogenic toxins and numerous studies have found anaphylaxis reactions to the PEG compounds in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The inoculations are being forced on all service members including those who have already recovered from COVID-19. This, despite the fact that numerous studies show proof that COVID-recovered patients have natural immunity. It is common sense and scientifically supported that those who have recovered do not require a vaccination. The military regulations agree on this point and the defining regulation (AR 40-562) actually excludes people with prior immunity from compulsory vaccinations; it also excludes people who are allergic to any ingredient. “This policy has been regulatory law in the military since 1908, so what has changed that would cause the secretary of defense to annul such a common sense rule?” This is the question posed by Colton Boyle, who is another lawyer on the case.

“There is a long history of safe and effective alternative treatments, approved by the Food and Drug Administration, which are proven worldwide to be highly effective in preventing and treating COVID-19,” according to Dr. Simone Gold, who heads America’s Frontline Doctors.  Attorney Dave Wilson, another case attorney and retired Army JAG officer questions “how an Emergency Use Authorization was ever granted in the first place.” In order to invoke the EUA statute, the Secretary of HHS has to find that no safe, available and approved drug exists to treat the medical emergency. “According to our best experts, there are many such already FDA approved drugs and remedies that show tremendous effectiveness in treating and even curing the underlying infection,” states John “Lou” Michels Jr., who also argued and won the preceding Anthrax case against Secretary Rumsfeld. The American government continues to block these safe and effective therapies and continues to favor recommending dangerous experimental vaccinations.  

Freedom is what makes the United States of America strong and great, and freedom, including the right to dissent, is what has kept our democracy going for more than 200 years. And it is freedom that will continue to keep it strong for my children and the children of all the people like my father, late father in law, grandfather, brother, me, and others like us who served honorably and proudly for freedom. Gary May, Vietnam veteran.


Total
332
Shares
23 comments
    1. The right to forego medical treatment including vaccines
      16A C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 780 Corpus Juris Secundum | February 2021 Update Constitutional Law
      Personal Liberty 1. In General, § 780. Definitions, nature, and extent.
      The right of personal liberty consists of the power of locomotion, of changing situation or removing one’s person to whatsoever place one’s inclination may direct without any restraint except by due process of law. Liberty under the law extends to the full range of conduct which an individual is free to pursue.1 It is not limited to freedoms exclusively named in either the Bill of Rights or elsewhere in the Constitution2 but instead extends to the basic values implicit in the concept of ordered liberty and to basic civil rights.3 The right of personal liberty consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation or removing one’s person to whatever place one’s inclination may direct without any restraint except by due process of law.4 It includes a person’s right to be let alone and to determine his or her mode of life whether it be a life of publicity or of privacy, and to order his or her life and manage his or her affairs in a manner that may be most agreeable to him or her, so long as he or she does not violate the rights of others or of the public.5 § 780. Definitions, nature, and extent,
      16A C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 780 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 Individuals have a right to be free from physical restraint6 and to move about as long as they are not committing a crime.7 Freedom of movement is a fundamental right within the concept of personal liberty8 and is generally associated with the fundamental right to travel.9 The right of personal liberty frequently includes other rights, such as the right to enter into and maintain certain human relationships,10 including family relationships and the parent-child relationship,11 the right to forego medical treatment,12 and the absence of arbitrary and unreasonable restraint on a person in the conduct of his or her business and the handling of his or her property.13 While there is some authority to the contrary,14 the right to live where one chooses is generally regarded as a fundamental right and an integral part of the right of liberty and is constitutionally protected.15 Liberty in this sense is the liberty of natural, not artificial, persons.16 Certain purely personal constitutional guarantees are unavailable to corporations and other organizations.17 Whether a right is purely personal depends on its nature, history, and purpose.18
      Westlaw. © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. Footnotes 1 U.S.—Neinast v. Board of Trustees of Columbus Metropolitan Library, 346 F.3d 585, 2003 FED App. 0363P (6th Cir. 2003); Ricks v. District of Columbia, 414 F.2d 1097 (D.C. Cir. 1968). 2 U.S.—Brown v. Supreme Court of Virginia, 359 F. Supp. 549 (E.D. Va. 1973), judgment aff’d, 414 U.S. 1034, 94 S. Ct. 533, 38 L. Ed. 2d 327 (1973) and judgment aff’d, 414 U.S. 1034, 94 S. Ct. 534, 38 L. Ed. 2d 327 (1973). Cal.—City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. Young, 2 Cal. 3d 259, 85 Cal. Rptr. 1, 466 P.2d 225, 37 A.L.R.3d 1313 (1970). 3 Cal.—City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. Young, 2 Cal. 3d 259, 85 Cal. Rptr. 1, 466 P.2d 225, 37 A.L.R.3d 1313 (1970). 4 U.S.—Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 3 S. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835 (1883). Okla.—Dowell v. City of Tulsa, 1954 OK 194, 273 P.2d 859, 43 A.L.R.2d 445 (Okla. 1954). Pretrial detention Any pretrial detention impinges on right to liberty. N.Y.—People ex rel. Wayburn v. Schupf, 39 N.Y.2d 682, 385 N.Y.S.2d 518, 350 N.E.2d 906 (1976). Right not to be imprisoned without hearing U.S.—Jackson v. Fair, 846 F.2d 811 (1st Cir. 1988). 5 Ga.—McDaniel v. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 60 Ga. App. 92, 2 S.E.2d 810 (1939). 6 Cal.—People v. Landau, 214 Cal. App. 4th 1, 154 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 (4th Dist. 2013), review filed, (Mar. 21, 2013). Md.—Wheeler v. State, 160 Md. App. 566, 864 A.2d 1058 (2005). Mass.—Com. v. Knapp, 441 Mass. 157, 804 N.E.2d 885 (2004). Wis.—State ex rel. Marberry v. Macht, 2002 WI App 133, 254 Wis. 2d 690, 648 N.W.2d 522 (Ct. App. 2002), decision rev’d on other grounds, 2003 WI 79, 262 Wis. 2d 720, 665 N.W.2d 155 (2003). Arrest and detention U.S.—Apton v. Wilson, 506 F.2d 83 (D.C. Cir. 1974). Right not reserved exclusively for U.S. citizens U.S.—Lozano-Castaneda v. Garcia, 238 F. Supp. 2d 853 (W.D. Tex. 2002).
      Constitutional law is that department of the law which treats constitutions and the validity of enactments as tested by the criterion of conformity to fundamental law.1 It is the field of law dealing with aspects of constitutional provisions, such as restrictions on government powers and guarantees of rights.2 It is also the body of law deriving from the U.S. Constitution and dealing primarily with governmental powers, civil rights, and civil liberties.3 In constitutional law, the word “constitution” implies the written instrument agreed upon by the people as the absolute rule of action and decision for all departments and officers of government, in respect to all points covered by it, which must control until it is changed by the authority which established it.4 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 4 . Constitutional law.
      The word “constitution” means a declaration of fundamental laws or principles for the government of a nation or state.1 A constitution is the fundamental law by which all people of the state are governed;2 it is the basic charter of state governance.3 A state constitution receives its force from the express will of the people4 and is the embodiment of the will of the people5 regarding the limits on governmental power.6 The legitimacy of any constitution is derived primarily from the consent of those agreeing to be bound by it.7 Where a constitution asserts a certain right or lays down a certain principle of law or procedure, it speaks for the entire people as their supreme law.8 Whatever the constitution prescribes, the general assembly, and every officer or citizen to whom the mandate is addressed, must do, and whatever it prohibits, the general assembly, and every officer and citizen, must refrain from doing.9 The government has broad powers, but the means it uses to achieve its ends must be consistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution.10 A strong public desire to improve the public condition is not enough to warrant achieving the desire by a shorter cut than the constitutional way.11 The powers granted under the Constitution are not infinite; the power the Constitution grants, it also restrains.12 Although a constitution may be either written (as in the case of the United States) or unwritten (as in the case of Great Britain), the word “constitution,” as applied to the organization of our federal and state governments, always implies a written document which is understood to have been enacted by the direct action of the people.13 A constitution is a fundamental document, which, in recognizing citizens’ rights and establishing government, provides essential checks and balances whose complexity is to be neither undervalued nor disregarded.14 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 1 2021 Update.
      A constitution serves to protect the people against arbitrary power.1 The basic purposes of a written constitution are to secure to people certain unchangeable rights and remedies and to curtail unrestricted governmental activity within defined fields.2 The guarantees provided by the federal and state constitutions apply equally to all and cannot be denied to any one person without weakening the rights of all.3 Indeed, a constitution is not primarily designed to protect majorities who are usually able to protect themselves but to preserve and protect the rights of individuals and minorities against the arbitrary actions of those in authority.4 It is thus a function of constitutions to declare and protect fundamental rights.5 A constitution is intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories.6 A constitution is, therefore, concerned with practical, substantial rights, not with those that are unclear and gain hold by subtle and involved reasoning.7 Constitutional rights cannot be created by statutes or rules,8 nor can they be abrogated by executive or judicial action.9 Further, the absence of an enabling statute cannot be construed to nullify rights provided by a constitution if those rights are sufficiently specific.10 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 6 . Declaration and protection of fundamental rights.
      Even Emergencies do not authorize new power or authority
      Emergencies do not authorize the suspension of a state constitution and its guaranties.1 Thus, no new power or authority is created by a public emergency,2 although such a situation may disclose the existence of latent power and may call for liberal construction of constitutional powers.3. 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 62 Effect of emergency on supremacy of state constitutions
      Emergencies do not authorize the suspension of a constitution and its guaranties.1 Rules of expediency cannot be placed above the constitution2 however well-intentioned the proponents of the departure from the constitution may be.3 The vitality of constitutional principles also cannot be allowed to yield simply because of a disagreement with them.4 Thus, an effort to accommodate community sentiment or the wishes of the majority of the voters, although usually valid and desirable, cannot justify the abandonment of a constitution.5 The rights guaranteed by a constitution are not, however, so absolute that they must be exercised under all circumstances and without any qualification but, like other rights, must always be exercised with reasonable regard for the conflicting rights ofothers.6 A constitution is not so rigid that it always mandates the same outcome even when its principles operate on a new set of facts that were previously unknown.7 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 7. Constitution not subject to suspension, departure, or abandonment
      “We the People of the United States were promised a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. Thus, a republican form of government guaranteed to the states by the United States Constitution,3 cannot be dispensed with or abolished.4 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 21 Subject matter and permissible scope of amendments to state constitutions—Federal limitations.
      “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, did ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”3 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 10 Adoption of United States Constitution.
      In the United States, the Congress and all of its members, as well as the President of the United States,11 all state12 and federal officials, and all state and federal courts and judges13 are as bound by the United States Constitution as are ordinary citizens. 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 6 2021 Update. This would include Sheriffs and all law enforcement, are bound by the United States Constitution.
      The State’s first significant problem is that the statements relied upon in the cases cited are pure and simple dicta, and, therefore, cannot serve as a source of binding authority as in American jurisprudence. See, e.g., Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275, 282, 149 L. Ed. 2d 517, 121 S. Ct. 1511 (2001) (“The Court is bound by holdings, not language.”); Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 379, 128 L. Ed. 2d 391, 114 S. Ct. 1673 (1994) (“It is to the holdings of our cases, rather than their dicta, that we must attend . . . .”); United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688, 706, 125 L. Ed. 2d 556, 113 S. Ct. 2849 (1993) (quoting United States Nat. Bank of Or. V. Independent Ins. Agents of Am., Inc., 508 U.S. 439, 463, n.11, 124 L. Ed. 2d 402, 113 S. Ct. 2173 (1993),
      According to the original 1936 claim of copyright for American Jurisprudence Volumes 1 and 2, “American [J]urisprudence [is] a comprehensive text statement of American case law, as developed in the cases and annotations in the annotated reports system, being a rewriting of Ruling [C]ase [L]aw to reflect the modern developments of the law.” Library of Congress, Catalog of Copyright Entries, Vol. 33

    2. Overburdened health authorities are trying to contain the pandemic through early interventions that protect the vulnerable regions of the human respiratory tract: the oral and nasal cavities. These regions are home to millions of viral particles that can be transmitted long-range through aerosolized droplets, increasing the risk of infection to caretakers and other highly exposed groups, like frontline workers. Since early 2020, there have been diverse clinical studies in repurposed antivirals, which can act as an adjunct to vaccination.
      7 conditions for onset Flu or Coronavirus: taste, fever, new persistent cough, chills, appetite loss and muscle aches.
      The Achilles Heel of Coronavirus, is while it is still in the developing stage as Coronavirus/Covid in the warm, wet areas inside the nasal passages of your head (nose) and before it gets to become Covid in your head and lungs, 10 to 14 days later. If Coronavirus is not treated with my free iodine salt clean water cure to flush out your nasal passages, as soon as possible, or during self isolation, it becomes Covid, which is where the money is. You cannot catch Covid! Always breathe through your nose and keep your mouth shut, because you really don’t want the Coronavirus to seed itself in your lungs!! My free salt water cure has “absolutely nothing” to do with mRNA test vaccines. Treating Coronavirus with my free iodine salt clean water cure, flushes out the nasal cavity and kills Coronavirus, before it gets to be Covid, irrespective of if you have had mRNA vaccines or not. Mix one heaped teaspoon of iodine salt in a mug of warm or cold clean water, cup a hand and pour some of the solution in, then sniff or snort that mugful up into your nose, spitting out everything which comes down into your mouth, by so doing, you flush out your nasal cavity, where Coronavirus lives. If you get a burning sensation (which lasts for 2-3 minutes) then you have a Coronavirus infection.When the soreness goes away, blow out your head with toilet paper and flush away, washing your hands afterwards and continue doing my salt clean water nasal cavity flush cure, morning, noon and night, or more often, if you want, until, when you do my free salt water cure, you don’t experience any soreness at all in your nasal cavity. While you are at it, swallow a couple of mouthfulls and if you get a burning sensation in your chest, then you are killing the Covid/Bronchitis there too, so keep it up, each time you do a salt water sniffle, until the soreness in your head and lungs goes away – job done. Pour some of the solution on a flat surface and allow to dry and see what you have then. This is what coats the nasal passages in your head and kills Coronavirus/Covid off. You can see why it is so effective. This is what I have done for the past 27 years and I am NEVER ill, nor do you need to be either.
      Please pass it around to everyone who wants to give it a try.
      “Even so, a key issue is that the current vaccines block severe disease but do not prevent infection, said Dr. Gregory Poland, a vaccine scientist at the Mayo Clinic. That is because the virus is still capable of replicating in the nose, even among vaccinated people, who can then transmit the disease through tiny, aerosolized droplets”
      Reuters – what my free salt water cure stops.
      He added that “Current vaccines are great at preventing [CO1] serious infection deep in the lungs, but not at blocking infection in the upper airways. What’s needed is a nasal-spray (vaccine) that would stop the coronavirus from taking hold at all.” – what my free salt water cure does and stops.
      No soreness when you do it, it feels like you are flushing your head with water, if you get sore reaction, you have a virus so deal with it, exactly as I have described above – did a sniffle today – Me, all OK!!
      We all need a cure which works instead of these vaccines, when you get a Flu or Coronavirus infection – now you have one.
      Do not use saline water bought online, use iodine based kitchen or sea salt, it is the iodine in the salt which kills Coronavirus dead
      More to the point, try it on anyone with a Flu or Coronavirus infection and see what happens to the virus and how quickly it is killed in the nasal passages of the head. No Coronavirus, no Covid it would otherwise become. – Simple
      Keep safe – Richard (smile)

    3. Graphene Outcomes?

      Neural Lace is when nanoparticles form a web around the brain so that it picks up brainwaves but can also send wave information to the brain. Neural link picks up the frequencies from Neural Lace then amplifies them, programs the brain and connects it to a Starlink network (AI remote control). Starlink are the Satellites.These things are owned by Elon Musk. He has also been seen on video talking about graphene, one atom thick, and able to be injected. There are now claims from Pathologists about this product being found in vials. SpaceX is the delivery system for Starlink. Stranger than fiction? If this is correct then the message is to never get tested or injected because AI technology is far more advanced than we realise.

      CairnsNews

    4. Vaccine Increases COVID by Over 300%
      HAFOctober 1, 2021
      The fraudulence of covid-19 vaccines is on full display, and the evidence is sitting right out in the open. The full FDA approval for Pfizer’s COMIRNATY vaccine contained clinical proof that the inoculation increases COVID infection by over 300 percent!
      A former Pfizer employee named Karen Kingston is blowing the whistle on her former employer. Kingston is currently a pharmaceutical marketing expert and biotech analyst. When she scrutinized the full FDA approval for COMIRNATY, she found blatant fraud in Pfizer’s clinical studies.
      FDA approves Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine, even though it increases infection by 300 percent
      Kingston brought forth a Briefing Document from the FDA’s advisory committee meeting that took place on September 17, 2021. The title of the document is, “Application for licensure of a booster dose for COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA).” The document includes clinical studies conducted by Pfizer. These studies track the durability of immunity offered by the COMIRNATY vaccine and compare it to immunity observed in unvaccinated people.
      “If you get the Pfizer vax, you’re more likely to get COVID” said Kingston, “So, when they weren’t injected, their infection rate was 1.3% and when they got injected, it was 4.34%. It went up by over 300%.” How could the FDA have glossed over this evidence and approved blatant fraud?
      Since the vaccine was officially approved, the federal government started applying pressure on businesses across the US, threatening them with extortion and fines if they do not impose vaccine mandates on their employees.
      The covid-19 vaccines have been injected almost 225 million times into the arms of Americans, causing severe injury and death along the way. Real world observations also support clinical data showing that the vaccines increase one’s susceptibility to covid-19.
      In fact, the vaccines increase viral load in the nostrils of the vaccinated. An August 26 article by Dr. Peter McCullough shows that the covid vaccines allow the vaccinated to carry 251 times the viral load of covid-19 in their nostrils, turning them into the asymptomatic super spreaders they once feared.
      Pfizer studies show that being unvaccinated offers greater protection
      Medical freedom rights attorney, Thomas Renz, went public with the Pfizer fraud. The Pfizer study involved over 36,000 people. Those who were injected earlier in the study were more likely to come down with covid infections later on, showing a clear trend of waning immunity. Those put in “high priority” groups, who were vaccinated earlier on, have a 36 percent greater chance of infection, compared to the group that vaccinated later on.
      The group that vaccinated later on went unvaccinated for 5.1 months longer than the group that got vaccinated early on. This placebo group did not have high rates of infection while they were unvaccinated, even though they went longer without any “protection.”
      Because of this, Kingston stated that the vaccinated group “have an even higher chance of being infected with COVID-19 than the 36 percent difference indicated by this portion of the study.”
      The study even admitted in its conclusion: “An additional analysis appears to indicate that incidence of COVID-19 generally increased in each group of study participants with increasing time post-Dose 2.” Kingston clarified that infection rates “increase over time” when people get two doses of Pfizer mRNA.
      Most shocking was the data on the placebo group. In the first four months, the placebo group had “no vaccine protection” and recorded an infection rate of 12.6 cases per 1,000 person-years. The infection rate for the unvaccinated was a meager 1.3 percent.
      After their placebo period, the group got “fully vaccinated.” In just a few months, this group became more infectious and showed 43.4 cases per 1,000 person-years. Their infection rate went UP by over 300 percent to a 4.34% infection rate. Mrs. Kingston called this “super alarming.”
      “They had less infection when they had no protection. So, that’s a problem,” she said.
      By Lance D Johnson / References: LifesiteNews.com; FDA.gov; Papers.SSRN.com
      Humans Are Free

      Me: Do my free salt water cure and murder Flu and Coronavirus in the head, before it ever gets to be Covid anything in the body – be like me – 27 years never ill from viruses – I never have vaccines for anything.

      Find my free cure on my Twitter Blog RichardNoakes19

  1. I was unable to access a Rumble video with the information given in this article. When I did a search for the video using the https location given in the first line of this article, the only thing that came up was this deep capture article. So maybe there is a typo or something missing? I also tried searching for Dr. Simone Gold’s Rumble videos. There are many videos of her done in the past year and a half, but I found nothing that matches the description in this article. Hopefully someone will find the video and give a functioning link.

  2. The right to forego medical treatment including vaccines
    16A C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 780 Corpus Juris Secundum | February 2021 Update Constitutional Law
    Personal Liberty 1. In General, § 780. Definitions, nature, and extent.
    The right of personal liberty consists of the power of locomotion, of changing situation or removing one’s person to whatsoever place one’s inclination may direct without any restraint except by due process of law. Liberty under the law extends to the full range of conduct which an individual is free to pursue.1 It is not limited to freedoms exclusively named in either the Bill of Rights or elsewhere in the Constitution2 but instead extends to the basic values implicit in the concept of ordered liberty and to basic civil rights.3 The right of personal liberty consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation or removing one’s person to whatever place one’s inclination may direct without any restraint except by due process of law.4 It includes a person’s right to be let alone and to determine his or her mode of life whether it be a life of publicity or of privacy, and to order his or her life and manage his or her affairs in a manner that may be most agreeable to him or her, so long as he or she does not violate the rights of others or of the public.5 § 780. Definitions, nature, and extent,
    16A C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 780 © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 Individuals have a right to be free from physical restraint6 and to move about as long as they are not committing a crime.7 Freedom of movement is a fundamental right within the concept of personal liberty8 and is generally associated with the fundamental right to travel.9 The right of personal liberty frequently includes other rights, such as the right to enter into and maintain certain human relationships,10 including family relationships and the parent-child relationship,11 the right to forego medical treatment,12 and the absence of arbitrary and unreasonable restraint on a person in the conduct of his or her business and the handling of his or her property.13 While there is some authority to the contrary,14 the right to live where one chooses is generally regarded as a fundamental right and an integral part of the right of liberty and is constitutionally protected.15 Liberty in this sense is the liberty of natural, not artificial, persons.16 Certain purely personal constitutional guarantees are unavailable to corporations and other organizations.17 Whether a right is purely personal depends on its nature, history, and purpose.18
    Westlaw. © 2021 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. Footnotes 1 U.S.—Neinast v. Board of Trustees of Columbus Metropolitan Library, 346 F.3d 585, 2003 FED App. 0363P (6th Cir. 2003); Ricks v. District of Columbia, 414 F.2d 1097 (D.C. Cir. 1968). 2 U.S.—Brown v. Supreme Court of Virginia, 359 F. Supp. 549 (E.D. Va. 1973), judgment aff’d, 414 U.S. 1034, 94 S. Ct. 533, 38 L. Ed. 2d 327 (1973) and judgment aff’d, 414 U.S. 1034, 94 S. Ct. 534, 38 L. Ed. 2d 327 (1973). Cal.—City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. Young, 2 Cal. 3d 259, 85 Cal. Rptr. 1, 466 P.2d 225, 37 A.L.R.3d 1313 (1970). 3 Cal.—City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. Young, 2 Cal. 3d 259, 85 Cal. Rptr. 1, 466 P.2d 225, 37 A.L.R.3d 1313 (1970). 4 U.S.—Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 3 S. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835 (1883). Okla.—Dowell v. City of Tulsa, 1954 OK 194, 273 P.2d 859, 43 A.L.R.2d 445 (Okla. 1954). Pretrial detention Any pretrial detention impinges on right to liberty. N.Y.—People ex rel. Wayburn v. Schupf, 39 N.Y.2d 682, 385 N.Y.S.2d 518, 350 N.E.2d 906 (1976). Right not to be imprisoned without hearing U.S.—Jackson v. Fair, 846 F.2d 811 (1st Cir. 1988). 5 Ga.—McDaniel v. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 60 Ga. App. 92, 2 S.E.2d 810 (1939). 6 Cal.—People v. Landau, 214 Cal. App. 4th 1, 154 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 (4th Dist. 2013), review filed, (Mar. 21, 2013). Md.—Wheeler v. State, 160 Md. App. 566, 864 A.2d 1058 (2005). Mass.—Com. v. Knapp, 441 Mass. 157, 804 N.E.2d 885 (2004). Wis.—State ex rel. Marberry v. Macht, 2002 WI App 133, 254 Wis. 2d 690, 648 N.W.2d 522 (Ct. App. 2002), decision rev’d on other grounds, 2003 WI 79, 262 Wis. 2d 720, 665 N.W.2d 155 (2003). Arrest and detention U.S.—Apton v. Wilson, 506 F.2d 83 (D.C. Cir. 1974). Right not reserved exclusively for U.S. citizens U.S.—Lozano-Castaneda v. Garcia, 238 F. Supp. 2d 853 (W.D. Tex. 2002).
    Constitutional law is that department of the law which treats constitutions and the validity of enactments as tested by the criterion of conformity to fundamental law.1 It is the field of law dealing with aspects of constitutional provisions, such as restrictions on government powers and guarantees of rights.2 It is also the body of law deriving from the U.S. Constitution and dealing primarily with governmental powers, civil rights, and civil liberties.3 In constitutional law, the word “constitution” implies the written instrument agreed upon by the people as the absolute rule of action and decision for all departments and officers of government, in respect to all points covered by it, which must control until it is changed by the authority which established it.4 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 4 . Constitutional law.
    The word “constitution” means a declaration of fundamental laws or principles for the government of a nation or state.1 A constitution is the fundamental law by which all people of the state are governed;2 it is the basic charter of state governance.3 A state constitution receives its force from the express will of the people4 and is the embodiment of the will of the people5 regarding the limits on governmental power.6 The legitimacy of any constitution is derived primarily from the consent of those agreeing to be bound by it.7 Where a constitution asserts a certain right or lays down a certain principle of law or procedure, it speaks for the entire people as their supreme law.8 Whatever the constitution prescribes, the general assembly, and every officer or citizen to whom the mandate is addressed, must do, and whatever it prohibits, the general assembly, and every officer and citizen, must refrain from doing.9 The government has broad powers, but the means it uses to achieve its ends must be consistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution.10 A strong public desire to improve the public condition is not enough to warrant achieving the desire by a shorter cut than the constitutional way.11 The powers granted under the Constitution are not infinite; the power the Constitution grants, it also restrains.12 Although a constitution may be either written (as in the case of the United States) or unwritten (as in the case of Great Britain), the word “constitution,” as applied to the organization of our federal and state governments, always implies a written document which is understood to have been enacted by the direct action of the people.13 A constitution is a fundamental document, which, in recognizing citizens’ rights and establishing government, provides essential checks and balances whose complexity is to be neither undervalued nor disregarded.14 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 1 2021 Update.
    A constitution serves to protect the people against arbitrary power.1 The basic purposes of a written constitution are to secure to people certain unchangeable rights and remedies and to curtail unrestricted governmental activity within defined fields.2 The guarantees provided by the federal and state constitutions apply equally to all and cannot be denied to any one person without weakening the rights of all.3 Indeed, a constitution is not primarily designed to protect majorities who are usually able to protect themselves but to preserve and protect the rights of individuals and minorities against the arbitrary actions of those in authority.4 It is thus a function of constitutions to declare and protect fundamental rights.5 A constitution is intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories.6 A constitution is, therefore, concerned with practical, substantial rights, not with those that are unclear and gain hold by subtle and involved reasoning.7 Constitutional rights cannot be created by statutes or rules,8 nor can they be abrogated by executive or judicial action.9 Further, the absence of an enabling statute cannot be construed to nullify rights provided by a constitution if those rights are sufficiently specific.10 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 6 . Declaration and protection of fundamental rights.
    Even Emergencies do not authorize new power or authority
    Emergencies do not authorize the suspension of a state constitution and its guaranties.1 Thus, no new power or authority is created by a public emergency,2 although such a situation may disclose the existence of latent power and may call for liberal construction of constitutional powers.3. 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 62 Effect of emergency on supremacy of state constitutions
    Emergencies do not authorize the suspension of a constitution and its guaranties.1 Rules of expediency cannot be placed above the constitution2 however well-intentioned the proponents of the departure from the constitution may be.3 The vitality of constitutional principles also cannot be allowed to yield simply because of a disagreement with them.4 Thus, an effort to accommodate community sentiment or the wishes of the majority of the voters, although usually valid and desirable, cannot justify the abandonment of a constitution.5 The rights guaranteed by a constitution are not, however, so absolute that they must be exercised under all circumstances and without any qualification but, like other rights, must always be exercised with reasonable regard for the conflicting rights ofothers.6 A constitution is not so rigid that it always mandates the same outcome even when its principles operate on a new set of facts that were previously unknown.7 16 C.J.S. Constitutional Law § 7. Constitution not subject to suspension, departure, or abandonment
    “We the People of the United States were promised a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. Thus, a republican form of government guaranteed to the states by the United States Constitution,3 cannot be dispensed with or abolished.4 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 21 Subject matter and permissible scope of amendments to state constitutions—Federal limitations.
    “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, did ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”3 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 10 Adoption of United States Constitution.
    In the United States, the Congress and all of its members, as well as the President of the United States,11 all state12 and federal officials, and all state and federal courts and judges13 are as bound by the United States Constitution as are ordinary citizens. 16 Am. Jur. 2d Constitutional Law § 6 2021 Update.
    This would include Sheriffs and all law enforcement, are bound by the United States Constitution & Constitutional Law.
    The State’s first significant problem is that the statements relied upon in the cases cited are pure and simple dicta, and, therefore, cannot serve as a source of binding authority as in American jurisprudence. See, e.g., Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275, 282, 149 L. Ed. 2d 517, 121 S. Ct. 1511 (2001) (“The Court is bound by holdings, not language.”); Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 379, 128 L. Ed. 2d 391, 114 S. Ct. 1673 (1994) (“It is to the holdings of our cases, rather than their dicta, that we must attend . . . .”); United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688, 706, 125 L. Ed. 2d 556, 113 S. Ct. 2849 (1993) (quoting United States Nat. Bank of Or. V. Independent Ins. Agents of Am., Inc., 508 U.S. 439, 463, n.11, 124 L. Ed. 2d 402, 113 S. Ct. 2173 (1993),
    According to the original 1936 claim of copyright for American Jurisprudence Volumes 1 and 2, “American [J]urisprudence [is] a comprehensive text statement of American case law, as developed in the cases and annotations in the annotated reports system, being a rewriting of Ruling [C]ase [L]aw to reflect the modern developments of the law.” Library of Congress, Catalog of Copyright Entries, Vol. 33
    Since “American [J]urisprudence [is] a comprehensive text statement of American case law, as developed in the cases and annotations in the annotated reports system, being a rewriting of Ruling [C]ase [L]aw to reflect the modern developments of the law.” It is clearly far more than just an encyclopedia and defiantly is binding law!

  3. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 800$+ daily… You can earn from16000$-32000$ a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity
    This Website OPEN HERE…….>> http://thefreedomjobnetwork.unaux.com/

  4. Patrick that PEG Polyetheline Glycol crap is in the most popular laxative on the market whivh they have been giving to autistic children gor sever years now! It also causes impulsive violdnt crime & insanity. It should be illegal!

  5. You can say what you want about polyethylene glycol, but I take it regularly every day as a maintenance laxative (I’m 73-years old). I have no idea what happens if polyethylene glycol (PEG) in solution is injected into muscle tissue, but to state that it is a toxic substance is just incorrect. I think even a cursory search on PEG might caution you against such sweeping statements as you have made in this presentation. You even claimed that it is a carcinogen. Again, I think what you have presented is half-baked at best.

  6. Single Mom Makes $89,844/Yr in Her Spare Time on The Computer Without Selling Anything. you can bring from $5000-$8000 of extra income every month. working at home for 4 hours a day, and earning could be even bigger.

    The potential with this is endless…>>>>>> http://lifework1.com/

  7. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 800$+ daily… You can earn from16000$-32000$ a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish…lli It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity

    This Website OPEN HERE…….>> 𝐡𝐭𝐭𝐩://𝐰𝐰𝐰.𝐣𝐨𝐛𝐬𝟕𝟎.𝐜𝐨𝐦

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous Article

AFFIDAVIT OF LTC. THERESA LONG M.D. IN SUPPORT OF A MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER

Next Article

Maricopa's election results are not reliable and should not have been certified

Related Posts
Total
332
Share