Forced Vaccination is a Crime Against Humanity

Forced Vaccination is a Crime Against Humanity

The Nuremberg Doctors Trial

Across the United States*, triggered by a small up-tick in the few cases of measles, and although more children die from the "unavoidably unsafe" measles vaccine than from the disease itself, legislators are demanding "tougher laws" forcing families to vaccinate, or lose public benefits. That these same legislators are beneficiaries of significant drug company political payments is not surprising.

What is surprising is the legislators willing connivance with those who push forced vaccination as somehow a "public health benefit," despite the failure of the US government to provide any of the vaccine safety reports that have been required by law since 1986.

When Congress abrogated our right to petition the federal and state courts for vaccine injuries in 1986 the promise was that vaccines would become safer and that the federal government would report to Congress annually about progress. No such reports have been submitted while families have suffered thousands of dead and maimed children as the legacy of US vaccination policy.

The horrors of vaccine pseudo-science could, perhaps, have been tolerated, since families could have, in the past, always opt out of vaccination for religious or philosophical reasons. Where there is risk, there must be choice. However, that promise of Informed Consent is now under concerted attack in state after state.

Exemptions created by legislators can be abolished, it is claimed, by legislators. That's may be accurate, but only if the change in law does not violate our inalienable rights.

Legislators must understand international limits on their asserted power over the issue of forced vaccination. Wars have consequences and one of the consequences of WWII was the enactment, as part of customary international law, binding on all nations, of the Nuremberg Code.

US government, during the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials, and specifically the infamous Nazi Doctors Trial, promulgated the Nuremberg Code, as a restatement of the existing law of Informed Consent. It tried and hung Nazi Doctors for crimes against humanity -- violating the universal right of Informed Consent.

It did so under the Geneva Convention provisions that say a power holding a prisoner of war may try the prisoner for war crimes only if the same law applies to the country holding the prisoner.

Thus, by action of the Geneva Conventions the Nuremberg Code applies in the USA.

I’ve written a detailed Brief on the Law of Informed Consent here: http://drrimatruthreports.com/a-brief-for-informed-consent/ — showing how subsequent international law (including the UN Bioethics Declaration), US statutory law and cases support the right.

In 1914, Judge (later Supreme Court Justice) Benjamin Cardozo validated the concept of voluntary consent when he noted that every human being has a right to decide what shall be done with his or her body, deeming medical intervention without Informed Consent an unlawful trespass:

“Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body; and a surgeon who performs an operation without his patient’s consent commits an assault for which he is liable in damages.” Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hosp.,105 N.E. 92, 93 (N.Y. 1914)

In one recent case, Missouri v McNeely, 569 US 141 (2013) the Supreme Court said, even a “…diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish the… privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing the… skin. And though a blood test conducted in a medical setting by trained personnel is less intrusive than other bodily invasions, this Court has never retreated from its recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests…” (page 15).

The relevant point is that legislators, whether state or federal, have no authority to disregard the right of Informed Consent.

If they do so, they too stand in the Nuremberg Docket with the Nazi Doctors. There is no middle ground. Either a politician stands for the universal right of Informed Consent or is aiding and abetting crimes against humanity.

Conscientious objectors to vaccination must assert our universal right to Informed Consent, separate from any legislative exemptions, in order to preserve it. Learn more here: http://tinyurl.com/AVDcard

* And in the EU, Canada, Australia and elsewhere. While Vancouver declared an "outbreak" over 9 measles cases, Los Angeles has suffered a dramatic increase in typhus cases, from 2 in 2017 to at least 120 in 2018 with barely a mention in the drug-company-advertising dependent mass media. Maybe because there is no commercially available typhus vaccine?

New Jersey Attacks Vax Conscientious Objection

The Vax-Nazis Target Another State
This Time It's New Jersey Attacking Vaccine Conscientious Objection

An Open Letter to the Legislature of New Jersey
Regarding A3818 / S2173
It is imperative that we raise our voices loudly
enough to change the outcome of this
disaster-in-the-making
Open Letter Sign-Up Below

Here is the situation in a nutshell: Informed Consent is a fundamental human right protected against any diminishment through any denial of philosophical or religious conscientious objections to mandated vaccination. Informed Consent is a separate, specially protected legal concept and right. It is completely separate from statutory exemptions which means that it may not be abolished by ANY legislature. The fact is, however, that the universal right to Informed Consent is utterly meaningless without the right to refuse ANY medical intervention, including vaccination. This right is not only protected under international treaty law, which controls US law, but it is also a First Amendment-protected expressive association right: the right to express “No!” to government-mandated medical intervention.

We are happy to report that New Jersey health freedom advocates have successfully resisted attacks on vaccine freedom of choice nearly annually for over the past decade. Once again, however, the state government is poised to attempt to eliminate religious exemptions in the Garden State. This time the tactic is to amend an already unacceptable pending bill that was supposed to “reform” the traditional religious exemption by making it harder to use a religious exemption. That bill, A3818 (S2173), has been amended to abolish religious conscientious objections and is being rushed through the legislature as you read this. This push against conscientious objection is absolutely contrary to our state’s legal tradition and illegal under both the Constitution of the United States and International Treaty Law.

New Jersey has a long and honorable tradition of protecting religious conscientious objections to forced medical interventions which is completely in keeping with our tradition of religious liberty.

This is consistent with the larger body of American jurisprudence which has honored the right to Informed Consent since at least 1914 when Judge (later Supreme Court Justice) Benjamin Cardozo validated the concept of 'voluntary consent' when he noted that every human being has a right to decide what shall be done with his or her body, because medical intervention without Informed Consent is an unlawful trespass: “Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body; and a surgeon who performs an operation without his patient’s consent commits an assault for which he is liable in damages.” Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hosp.,105 N.E. 92, 93 (N.Y. 1914)

In 2013, the US Supreme Court reiterated this basic legal position in a DUI blood sample case saying that even a “…diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish the… privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing the… skin. And though a blood test conducted in a medical setting by trained personnel is less intrusive than other bodily invasions, this Court has never retreated from its recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests…” Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013)

The right to Informed Consent is universally recognized and is enshrined in international law under the Nuremberg 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.” http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html

Not only that, the United Nations Bioethics Declaration states, “Article 6 – Consent – 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. 2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice… Article 28 – Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any claim to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity…”  http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Yet somehow, the state of New Jersey wants to act as if it is not bound by these laws, treaties and principles: If Bill No. A3818/2173 is passed as currently amended, it is poised to adopt a disastrous law which is clearly “contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity…”.

True, the legislature may have power to repeal an exemption it granted many decades ago, no matter how unwise that repeal may be, but the legislature does not have any lawful authority to repeal the universal right to Informed Consent. Nor does it have authority to condition any other right, such as the right to a free public education, upon the surrendering of the right to Informed Consent. Such a condition is an “unconstitutional condition” which federal courts are empowered to overturn.

The law and doctrine of “unconstitutional conditions” has been well developed since the 1870’s and was summarized by the US Supreme Court in 1972: “…this court has made it clear that even though a person has no ‘right’ to a valuable governmental benefit and even though the government may deny him the benefit for any number of reasons, there are some reasons upon which the government may not rely. It may not deny a benefit to a person on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected interests – especially, his interest in freedom of speech. For if the government could deny a benefit to a person because of his constitutionally protected speech or associations, his exercise of those freedoms would in effect be penalized and inhibited. This would allow the government to “produce a result which (it) could not command directly.” Perry v Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 597 (1972)

This is extremely serious and goes well beyond vaccination choice.

If we allow the legislature of New Jersey to adopt A3818 it is adopting a law that effectively forbids parents from expressing their conscientious objection to mandated vaccines. This bill is a free speech-gagging bill that violates fundamental First Amendment rights to religious liberty, freedom of speech and freedom of association. It further attacks the universal right of Informed Consent. It places the legislature of New Jersey in (one hopes unintended) league with the Nazi Doctors who were rightly condemned and executed for violating Informed Consent, by the whole world at the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials. Ironically, these Subsequent Nuremberg Trials were conducted by just one ally, The United States because so many in the US were shocked to the core by a system and its medical servants who would, and could, take away the rights of people to exercise control over their own bodies.

We must raise our voices now and remind the legislators of New Jersey that we are still shocked to the core by any such attempt, especially here on US soil.

No person of conscience can remain silent in the face of this brutal attack on one of the deepest foundation stones of the fundamental moral basis of civilization. If we remain silent, and this bill passes, shame on us. Vaccines have been declared by our courts to be “unavoidably unsafe.” [1] Where there is risk there must be Informed Consent. Anything less returns us to the barbarism that was outlawed at Nuremberg.

There are three actions to be taken here. One is personal and two are social.

First, Protect yourself and the ones you love by asserting your right to Informed Consent with the Advance Vaccine Directive card: https://tinyurl.com/AVDcard.

Second, click the link below to let your voice resonate in the ears of the New Jersey legislature. Once you fill in the form, I’ll add your name as a signatory to our Open Letter to the NJ legislature. Please add your name whether you live in New Jersey or not. By the way, as our Thank You, you'll receive a subscription with no cost to you to the Health Freedom Newsletter from Dr. Rima (Rima E. Laibow MD).

Third step, and this is very important, is to share this item and this link -- http://drrimatruthreports.com/new-jersey-attacking-vaccine-conscientious-objection/ -- on Social Media of all types. Let your Circle of Influence know that the battle is raging and we need their support. And urge them to share it, too.

Oh, yes, remember to contact your state legislators directly if you live in NJ! Emails and phone calls to the legislators will make a difference, but only if you do it now! 

Their contact details are available here:   https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/SelectRep.asp

Also, a list of Senate health committee members with email addresses is at the bottom of this post.

Ralph Fucetola JD
Natural Solutions Trustee

Share this message with this link: http://drrimatruthreports.com/new-jersey-attacking-vaccine-conscientious-objection/

[1] See Justice Sotomayor’s 2011 dissent in Bruesewitz vs Wyeth, where she discusses the history of “unavoidably unsafe.” https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-152.ZD.html

------------------------

NJ Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee

Joseph F. Vitale Democratic chair SenVitale@njleg.org

Fred H. Madden Democratic vice-chair SenMadden@njleg.org

Kristin M. Corrado Republican member SenCorrado@njleg.org

Joseph A. Lagana Democratic member SenLagana@njleg.org

Vin Gopal Democratic member SenGopal@njleg.org

James W. Holzapfel Republican member SenHolzapfel@njleg.org

Robert W. Singer Republican member SenSinger@njleg.org

Ronald L. Rice Democratic member SenRice@njleg.org

Richard J. Codey Democratic member SenCodey@njleg.org