I think the National Academies has cornered the market in whitewash. When will we get an honest look at the harms and death government caused via mandating experimental jabs?
There should be a public review of the paper and all comments made available to the public. One big problem is under reporting. Because the hospitals and bureaucrats hold and hide the data under the Privacy Act, we have no idea if the sufferers of these conditions were assigned as accidents injured. I know two people who were admitted to hospital within days ofeach other with major blood clots in the neck. To the best of my knowledge neither was linked to the vaccine, even though there was a temporal association. I submitted a CARM (NZ) report for the one who died . They hospital won't tell me anything because of Privacy.
and will they look at the harm hydrogel and nanobots cause(d) , since all the Quaxx companies admitted that they are actual ingredients of the kill and maim shots....
judges will have to excuse themselves from the important trials due to bias...:)
Is there a complete list of adverse effects somewhere? I think that Hippocrates Health Centre published something way back.
This needs to see the light of day. I want to be in daily contact with my senators and my rep. What the inquiry ends up saying is not as important as what we have all said to our reps.
While the pirates are firmly in control of the ship and so there will be no definitive victory and all inquiries will make sure that the truth does not emerge. The system is sensitive to criticism. They have not yet closed us down enough to ignore widespread concern.
Omission is a well known tactic of dystopia. Hammering this point with our so called reps will tend to worry them still.
The findings read as I would expect them but get this, what most people do not realise is this. When they release findings and state "This vaccine BN#######" whatever is linked to causing such and such. They are not stating the mRNA caused it, just that one vaccine version. Any others that came after it do not count and they have not found mRNA is doing anything to anyone unless they say "mRNA contained within BN##### is directly correlated to the following adverse events". The mRNA is innocent.
An excerpt : In Roguski's view, the Pandemic Treaty of today is much, much different than the one proposed over a year ago. This appears to be intentional in that the earlier versions may have been the red herring to throw everyone off from focusing their efforts where it matters most.
He is encouraging everyone to read the latest version of the pandemic agreement to see what they think.
"WHAT IF ... the proposed 'Pandemic Agreement' is NOT an attack on national sovereignty?" Roguski asks. "What if, in fact, it is an expression of national sovereignty, but sovereignty is defined in the document to mean something different than you think it means?"
"WHAT IF ... 'national sovereignty' and 'legally binding' international agreements don't work the way you think they work? ... WHAT IF ... the WHO negotiations are NOT about your relationship with your doctor? What if your medical doctor is already a well-trained marketing representative for the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex?"
Have a look at the latest documents and let us know what you think.
InPower.com posted an example of a "Notice of Liability" document that may offer a useful, effective way forward. I heard of it on the James Corbett report.
There should be a public review of the paper and all comments made available to the public. One big problem is under reporting. Because the hospitals and bureaucrats hold and hide the data under the Privacy Act, we have no idea if the sufferers of these conditions were assigned as accidents injured. I know two people who were admitted to hospital within days ofeach other with major blood clots in the neck. To the best of my knowledge neither was linked to the vaccine, even though there was a temporal association. I submitted a CARM (NZ) report for the one who died . They hospital won't tell me anything because of Privacy.
Agreed.
As for the unmaking of history, we really don't know.
Encl.
https://lawyerlisa.substack.com/p/hatching-of-plan-filmed-live-at-the?
and will they look at the harm hydrogel and nanobots cause(d) , since all the Quaxx companies admitted that they are actual ingredients of the kill and maim shots....
judges will have to excuse themselves from the important trials due to bias...:)
Is there a complete list of adverse effects somewhere? I think that Hippocrates Health Centre published something way back.
This needs to see the light of day. I want to be in daily contact with my senators and my rep. What the inquiry ends up saying is not as important as what we have all said to our reps.
While the pirates are firmly in control of the ship and so there will be no definitive victory and all inquiries will make sure that the truth does not emerge. The system is sensitive to criticism. They have not yet closed us down enough to ignore widespread concern.
Omission is a well known tactic of dystopia. Hammering this point with our so called reps will tend to worry them still.
The findings read as I would expect them but get this, what most people do not realise is this. When they release findings and state "This vaccine BN#######" whatever is linked to causing such and such. They are not stating the mRNA caused it, just that one vaccine version. Any others that came after it do not count and they have not found mRNA is doing anything to anyone unless they say "mRNA contained within BN##### is directly correlated to the following adverse events". The mRNA is innocent.
An excerpt : In Roguski's view, the Pandemic Treaty of today is much, much different than the one proposed over a year ago. This appears to be intentional in that the earlier versions may have been the red herring to throw everyone off from focusing their efforts where it matters most.
He is encouraging everyone to read the latest version of the pandemic agreement to see what they think.
"WHAT IF ... the proposed 'Pandemic Agreement' is NOT an attack on national sovereignty?" Roguski asks. "What if, in fact, it is an expression of national sovereignty, but sovereignty is defined in the document to mean something different than you think it means?"
"WHAT IF ... 'national sovereignty' and 'legally binding' international agreements don't work the way you think they work? ... WHAT IF ... the WHO negotiations are NOT about your relationship with your doctor? What if your medical doctor is already a well-trained marketing representative for the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex?"
Have a look at the latest documents and let us know what you think.
Sources for this article include:
JamesRoguski.substack.com
InPower.com posted an example of a "Notice of Liability" document that may offer a useful, effective way forward. I heard of it on the James Corbett report.