Forwarded from DISASTER X (Maximilian Forte)
WILL THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE RESPOND TO FRANCE'S PUSH TOWARD MANDATORY VACCINATION?
In 1997 the Council of Europe issued a declaration, under a lengthy title: Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Chapter II, “Consent,” Article 5, “General Rule,” stands out as especially relevant: “An intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it”. Note that this does not entertain the debate over whether “experimental” vs. “investigational” should be the appropriate term. It simply refers to any “intervention” in the health field, regardless of the label one uses for that intervention.
In addition Article 5 states: “This person shall beforehand be given appropriate information as to the purpose and nature of the intervention as well as on its consequences and risks”. While we certainly are aware of the purpose of the intervention in the case of injections to counter Covid-19, clearly not many understand the nature of the injectables, nor are all of the consequences and risks known yet—therefore, informed consent for any injection, no matter how seemingly voluntary, can be said to have been “informed” because not all of the information is yet known or made public. Under such conditions, no informed consent has been possible, for any anyone.
Article 5 also adds: “The person concerned may freely withdraw consent at any time”—thus any mandatory vaccination campaign would be a violation, since it removes the right to withdraw consent.
Has there been a "Frexit," and we missed the news?
#covid19 #France #EU #mandatory_vaccination #VaccinePassports
In 1997 the Council of Europe issued a declaration, under a lengthy title: Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Chapter II, “Consent,” Article 5, “General Rule,” stands out as especially relevant: “An intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it”. Note that this does not entertain the debate over whether “experimental” vs. “investigational” should be the appropriate term. It simply refers to any “intervention” in the health field, regardless of the label one uses for that intervention.
In addition Article 5 states: “This person shall beforehand be given appropriate information as to the purpose and nature of the intervention as well as on its consequences and risks”. While we certainly are aware of the purpose of the intervention in the case of injections to counter Covid-19, clearly not many understand the nature of the injectables, nor are all of the consequences and risks known yet—therefore, informed consent for any injection, no matter how seemingly voluntary, can be said to have been “informed” because not all of the information is yet known or made public. Under such conditions, no informed consent has been possible, for any anyone.
Article 5 also adds: “The person concerned may freely withdraw consent at any time”—thus any mandatory vaccination campaign would be a violation, since it removes the right to withdraw consent.
Has there been a "Frexit," and we missed the news?
#covid19 #France #EU #mandatory_vaccination #VaccinePassports
Forwarded from Oskar
https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2021-07-14-fine-of-45-000-euros-planned-for-establishments-that-do-not-control-the-health-pass---france-24.BklJENLhpu.html
"The operator of a place that fails to meet future health pass control obligations will be liable to a fine of up to 45,000 euros and one year in prison [...]"
"The operator of a place that fails to meet future health pass control obligations will be liable to a fine of up to 45,000 euros and one year in prison [...]"
Tellerreport
Fine of 45,000 euros planned for establishments that do not control the health pass - France 24 | tellerreport.com
Fine of 45,000 euros provided for establishments that do not control the health pass
Paris (AFP)
The operator of a place that fails to meet future health pass control obligations will be liable to a fine of up to 45,000 euros and one year in prison, according…
Paris (AFP)
The operator of a place that fails to meet future health pass control obligations will be liable to a fine of up to 45,000 euros and one year in prison, according…
The label "anti-vaxxer" by definition can't be used against those who oppose injections which are not vaccines. Anything which does not prevent infection or transmission is NOT a vaccine. Therefore those protesting the jabs are NOT anti-vaxxers. Full stop.
default.pdf
481 KB
Everyone in the UK needs a copy of this parliamentary report finding “covid certification passes to be discriminatory” so they can bring legal action against anyone trying to impose it. Parliament says it is discrimination and breaks human rights and equality laws.
BIDEN & THE DNC ARE GOING FOR CENSORSHIP OF TEXT MESSAGES NEXT.
"Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and **text messages** ."
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccination-campaign-499278
"Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and **text messages** ."
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccination-campaign-499278
POLITICO
‘Potentially a death sentence’: White House goes off on vaccine fearmongers
The administration has shifted to a head-on strategy to dispel fear-mongering over its door-to-door efforts.
Anybody promoting FEAR
Whether it is medical, pandemic, environmental or identity/sexual/racial fear,
Is part of the DIVIDE & CONQUER propaganda arm of the state
Project Full Oligarchic Dominance.
Whether it is medical, pandemic, environmental or identity/sexual/racial fear,
Is part of the DIVIDE & CONQUER propaganda arm of the state
Project Full Oligarchic Dominance.
t.me/stuartharrytaylor
The label "anti-vaxxer" by definition can't be used against those who oppose injections which are not vaccines. Anything which does not prevent infection or transmission is NOT a vaccine. Therefore those protesting the jabs are NOT anti-vaxxers. The correct term is "Clot-$hot". Therefore those who oppose are anti-clot$hotters.
The label "anti-vaxxer" by definition can't be used against those who oppose injections which are not vaccines. Anything which does not prevent infection or transmission is NOT a vaccine. Therefore those protesting the jabs are NOT anti-vaxxers. The correct term is "Clot-$hot". Therefore those who oppose are anti-clot$hotters.
At the heart of the most dangerous monotheistic religion ever known to mankind, Covidism, lay an empty and absent God, for the alleged "vaccine" was nothing of the sort: the God & Emperor of Covidism was naked, the religion based on an original lie.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Danser Encore in Dublin mash up with Shame on You
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
See why Aleksandr Dugin was demonized? He exposed the totalitarian drive behind Western fake Liberalism many years ago. He said it would lead to a post human totalitarian technological nightmare. HE WAS PROVED RIGHT.
Our enemy has one huge obvious weakness: the end goal of all their operations, the so called "vaccine" (clotshot), does not work like a vaccine, it's not a vaccine. That is one big weakness to found a terror campaign on. Let's focus on their weakness and tear them apart: they have nothing to stand on: their jabs do not prevent disease, they are not a vaccine, the Emperor of the biosecurity totalitarian state is naked! The lie is at the centre of it all: IT IS NOT A VACCINE!
The first line of a real informed consent for these injections would have to state CLEARLY:
"What you are about to get injected is not a vaccine as it does not prevent the disease nor the transmission of the disease, therefore it is not, and never will be, a vaccine."
If it does not state this it is not informed consent.
"What you are about to get injected is not a vaccine as it does not prevent the disease nor the transmission of the disease, therefore it is not, and never will be, a vaccine."
If it does not state this it is not informed consent.