New York State attorneys leave New Yorkers feeling helpless when advised not to pursue litigation in the Supreme Court.
Early this morning I received a message with a notification from the attorneys fighting to halt the ban on religious exemptions against the forced delivery of the MMR Vaccine.
“In the interests of prompt disclosure and transparency, lawyers involved in the religious repeal litigation had a conference call this evening. For personal reasons, I could not participate although I had requested the call and expected to do so.
After the call, those involved conveyed to me their consensus that I NOT seek review by the Supreme Court of the United States of the denial of the preliminary injunction of the religious repeal by NY courts.
I was advised that those on the call felt that the Supreme Court would more than likely reiterate the validity of court precedent permitting states to act as New York did rather than view New York’s action as an impermissible instance of religious discrimination. Whatever my personal views, I defer to those who have more experience litigating ‘vaccine’ cases and will NOT seek the review they oppose my seeking.
I report this rather immediately because, on these pages, I have previously expressed a desire to seek review of the state courts’ denial of the preliminary injunction I sought by the U.S. Supreme Court. From your responses, I know that many of you have supported that path. I was unaware until tonight of opposition by the other lawyers involved to that course, but feel it inappropriate to act in a manner contrary to the guidance of lawyers both equally committed to your cause and more experienced in the pitfalls of perils of seeking such review than I am.
Finally, I am awaiting a decision on the State’s motion to dismiss the case we filed challenging the religious repeal. I will keep you all apprised when I receive the decision rendered by Judge Hartman on that motion.
Thank you very much for your support through this process.”
My immediate thought after receiving this message was, The fix is in. They’re throwing the game.
I predicted this exact course of action back in August. Despite ample litigation efforts, there wasn’t a complete case filed that I could see winning. This made me think that the attorneys were doing a service to the Civil Courts by satiating the people with the half-hearted attempt at filing a grievance while knowing they had never put together a solid case. The people placed their trust in the attorneys. The average person believes an independent attorney they have paid is working for them as their representation with their best interests in mind. But, the attorney is an officer of the Court and holds a separate loyalty as a member of the British Accredited Registry-thus loyal to the nobility of the Crown.
The Courts in New York have already established irreparable harm as a result of the vaccines in question by the same legal pursuit. However the attorneys filing the current lawsuits have not addressed certain issues, already established, that prove that the risk caused by the use of vaccines outweighs the dangers they allege to prevent. Obvious evidence of wrongdoing has been present for years related to the pharmaceutical industry and the liberties it has taken with human life in order to make a profitable drug.
Violations of the Child Vaccination Liability Law from 1985 include the failure to produce the congressionally mandated biannual reports for 33 years by the FDA, CDC, HHS, and the pharmaceutical companies, so as to demonstrate evidence of safer and more effective vaccines.
When the use of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) produced evidence of noncompliance, it demonstrated enough violation to prove criminal racketeering and an engineered plot to leverage human life against the success of the medical economy. (Reference) https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/FDA-Relied-Upon-STUDIES-LICENSING-MMR-VACCINE-FOIA.pdf
Furthermore, evidence produced via the U.S. Patent Office demonstrates that the ownership of said vaccine rights belongs to the CDC and that the same body acts as the regulatory authority for the safety and efficacy of these drugs.
- HOUSE HEARING – CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND VACCINE DEVELOPMENT: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-106hhrg73042/html/CHRG-106hhrg73042.htm
In 2010, two virologists employed by Merck Pharmaceuticals went on record under oath stating that drug company executives instructed them to spike the results from vaccine studies to create a false positive for the creation of antibodies against mumps, measles and rubella. (Reference) https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.paed.381331.20.0.pdf
An independent body out of Italy identified the entire human genome of an aborted fetus infected with Leukemia in the MMR Vaccine in 2019.
- (Reference2) https://www.corvelva.it/it/speciale-corvelva/vaccinegate-en/vaccinegate-mrc-5-contained-in-priorix-tetra-complete-genome-sequencing.html
- (Reference3) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g_GaUFq22SwyuOouPadG9qbDT-a2m8VS/view
Toxic levels of Aluminum, Mercury, and MRC-5 were also identified as active signals with the ability and tendency to permanently manipulate the function of DNA. As already stated by the regulatory authorities, the research to validate how this contributes to human immunity–as has been claimed by the makers and that is commonly believed by the media and public–has not been undertaken.
VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
After filing as the plaintiff, placing the burden of proof on the regulatory authorities to demonstrate their compliance with the congressional mandate, we can establish that the authorities have violated the act that provided them immunity from all liability for damages caused by the vaccines. This is a clear violation of the mandate given to Human Health Services, who have already been provided opportunity to show evidence to the contrary, and are thus prevented from producing further evidence after the case is filed.
The Supreme Court’s ruling that establishes the imposition of vaccines in the case of a public health emergency does not apply to this case.
880 cases of measles out of 20 million people creates a .00004% risk of any New Yorker contracting the measles.
This cannot be justified as an emergency to remove Constitutional rights because the risk of using vaccines does not outweigh the benefit. According to reports provided by the U.S. Government, more deaths and autoimmune disorders have been caused by using the MMR vaccine in the past three years than deaths or related disorders in the past 30 years caused by the unvaccinated population infected with the measles.
- (Reference) https://healthimpactnews.com/2015/zero-u-s-measles-deaths-in-10-years-but-over-100-measles-vaccine-deaths-reported/
- (Reference2) https://www.globalresearch.ca/measles-vaccines-kill-more-people-than-measles-cdc-data-proves/5429736
The American Constitution is the overriding Law of the Land. Jurisprudence 177 Section 2 states that a state cannot create any law or statute appearing to look like a law that violates our Constitutional rights. These rights were not given to us by the Government and therefore cannot be taken from us by the Government. Furthermore, said statute is not recognized as a law and in fact is a no law, unenforceable by any regulatory authority and as such does not have to be obeyed by the people. The Government official who instituted such “law” can be immediately removed from office and held accountable on criminal charges.
During the Nuremberg Trials the law was recognized by the Treaty of Versailles, which states that no human life can be given any form of untested medication without their informed consent. As already established by the failure of the U.S. Corporation to reveal the many established and potential risks of vaccines, Merck’s attempt to manipulate the data, and HHS’ failure to comply with congressionally mandated research and reporting, informed co-consent is impossible to provide.
This undeniable fact proves that these same entities are guilty of crimes against humanity based upon their failure to perform. Further data and investigation establish gross negligence to act in the best interests of human health, and therefore any claim of a “health crisis” based on a measles outbreak is immediately null and void. In addition, the established authorities of this state of emergency cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the people based on their current and 33 year history of gross negligence.
The Constitution was established to regulate the Government, assist the people, and protect our freedom. The false narrative and sales pitch that has infected the mainstream rhetoric condemns intelligent and fact-based research while endorsing claims of protection and immunity without any solid data to support said claims. There is no lawful way in which these unnecessary and potentially harmful treatments hold the power or urgency to suspend our Constitutional rights.
This issue is not only about immunity against a common and relatively harmless virus. The real issue concerns a much more powerful virus, one that has infected the American people and which must be immediately eradicated –that of ignorance. We blindly accept anything that is repeated enough times on television, the internet, or in our society groups. Our collective agreement to remain ignorant is not an acceptable practice when it comes to the lives of our children and their ability to thrive.