Pandemic Timeline

Crimes Against Humanity, Politics

Secretary of Defense mandates COVID-19 vaccines for military by mid-September

Tags:

As of August 23, 2021, the Pfizer-BioNTech inoculation is now approved under the brand name Comirnaty. The Comirnaty/Pfizer-BioNTech Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine clearly states that pre-authorization Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and the Comirnaty vaccine are equivalent. Any objections based on the experimental status of this vaccine are now moot. The argument now becomes whether that approval was legal. Dr. Jane Ruby and Karen Kingston both have concerns about the legality of the approval. See the post about the approval for details.

  • Food & Drug Administration
    October 20, 2021. “Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine [Pfizer-BioNTech].” US Food & Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/144413/download.
    Food & Drug Administration.
    This document has instructions for healthcare providers who are administering the vaccines.

A letter from August 23, 2021, admits that there are differences between the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and the Comirnaty vaccine, though they are not spelled out.

The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.

The FDA is saying that the products are legally distinct.  They are not the same.  A case can be made that if the recipient did not receive a jab that did came out of a vial with a Comirnaty label, they did not receive the approved vaccine.

The FDA is saying that the products are legally distinct.  A case can be made that if the recipient did not receive a jab that did came out of a vial with a Comirnaty label, they did not receive the approved vaccine.

Indeed, a judge has actually ruled that it is only legal to jab service members with a product presented in approved packaging.  At this time, that means unless the vial has a Comirnaty label, it is NOT legal to jab a service member with it.  Perhaps take with you the ruling cited in the post linked here to any further jabbing appointments you must attend:

Since the approval of the Comirnaty vaccine, a new interpretation about the conditions needed to issue the waiver in the first place has come out. An Anonymous Marine Officer revealed that the waiver did not meet those conditions. Please listen carefully to what he has to say. And so military personnel have new arguments to use in their cases against accepting the jabs and perhaps overturn the results of court martials.  It was also stated in the ruling cited in the post above that Biden did NOT sign the appropriate waiver to require you to take an EUA jab.

Further, since the mandate was issued and Comirnaty was approved, Stiftung Corona Ausschuss sponsored a press conference in which serious vaccine safety issues were raised, including with Comirnaty specifically.  One of the lawyers in that press conference concluded thus:

One thing is clear.  Whoever carries on with the knowledge as of today is legally punishable.  They can say that they did this deliberately or at least partly deliberately.  And this is a crime against humanity, which is called deletion of human beings.  The parties are deleting their electorate here.  …  We could clearly say that our governments and the members of it and other [unintelligible] are punishable and they won’t get away with it.  Many people do not know how sick they are.

Given the standing issues cited in the November 12 ruling, it may be that another entity will have to file a complaint based on effectiveness.

The secretary of defense at least recognizes that none of the COVID-19 vaccines have been approved by the FDA.  They are all still in testing.  The expectation that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine could achieve full FDA licensure early next month seems optimistic to me.  There is an extensive schedule of testing that any vaccination must complete to receive FDA approval.  Already, test results are coming in indicating that there are serious problems with the vaccines, including the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

Let’s get clear on that last highlighted statement; No vaccine may be declared “safe” or “effective” until all required tests are completed and the FDA issues approval.  At this time, the vaccines have been made available under the terms of Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA).  The terms of EUAs clearly specify that neither “safe” nor “effective” may be used to describe these products until they are declared so by the FDA.  That has not yet happened.  None of these products are fully licensed yet.

It came out in a recent press conference that the FDA did not use the gene therapy checklist when approving the vaccines.  Early paperwork identified the mRNA vaccines as gene therapies, and so the gene therapy checklist most definitely applies.  Gene therapy testing has not been completed, and so the Comirnaty approval can be challenged on that basis, if you can find it at all.

The ability to mandate the use of unapproved drugs by the military is controlled by 10 U.S.C. § 1107 – Notice of use of an investigational new drug or a drug unapproved for its applied use.  Normally, consent is required from the member.  To override consent, the president must grant a waiver.  See 10 U.S.C. § 1107(f)(1).  If you want to refuse the vaccine, there is the precedent case of Doe V. Rumsfeld, but the actual law allows for an exception.

Let’s do a little math here. In a recent event, New South Wales, Australia brought 24,000 teenagers to a stadium without their parents present and jabbed them all.  Three of those teenagers died on the spot.  So that is one in 8,000 dead on the spot.  Let’s extrapolate that out to the military. The plan is to jab approximately 1,300,000 service members, many of whom are not that much older than the teenagers in NSW. If 1 in 8,000 will die on the spot when jabbed, that is about 162 service members that could be dead on the spot. There will be more deaths than that, since mean days until death from the jabs has been calculated to be 22 days. And that does not consider how many will be permanently disabled due to the jabs. Reportedly, only 20 service members died of COVID-19 in all of 2020. If the extrapolation is accurate, the Jab Day 1 death toll will be more than 8 TIMES the military’s 2020 COVID-19 death toll. And someone actually thinks it is a good idea to impose COVID-19 jabs on the military? Who does that person work for, really?

Meanwhile, it appears that at least some of you may be replaced by robots.

Sources:

Related:

Injunctions were issued in the following cases:

Those fighting the military case may find useful some of the judge’s statements in these cases.  Actual links to rulings for the injunctions are included in all three case report posts.

No injunction was issued in the following, but important legal points were explained:

Currently, only the Comirnaty jab can be mandated.  Vials with the EUA labeling are NOT acceptable substitutes.

See also, on this site:

Ladies and gentlemen of the military, you may yet have a chance.  I once thought that perhaps you were screwed with little if any recourse, but it appears that may not be the case.  Pay close attention to the details in the Stew Peters video with the Anonymous Marine Officer.  It’s going to be a battle, but you must win it — not just for yourselves, but for all citizens.  So far, you have a win in the ruling by Judge Allen Winsor even though no injunction was issued.  Who knew when you enlisted that you would be faced with a situation in which you would have to challenge your own leaders?  But remember your oath and duties.  You made that oath to the Constitution, not to a person, and you have a duty to reject unlawful orders.  Among facts in your favor is that the military is asking you to take a drug that is not yet available.  Further, Biden was too eager to grant the waiver, and yet not all of the qualifications of that waiver have been met.  Listen carefully to what the Anonymous Marine Officer said.  The strategy of the fight is in that message.

The jabs do not prevent infection or spread. There is no good reason to take them. For every one person protected from infection, at least two will die from the vaccine. At best, the jabs might make the COVID-19 disease less serious when you do catch it.  Maybe.  But newer numbers are coming out indicating that the vaccinated are more likely to die.  Generally, the vaccinated are spreaders of the spike protein synthetic virus, known as “shedding,” and they can still spread the original virus and its variants when those come around. Several experts have gone so far as to say that the vaccines are bioweapons. My understanding is that the genome for the spike protein made by the vaccines was provided by China. The vaccinated could develop Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) that could cause them to overreact to the next cold or flu that comes around or they could suffer a long, drawn-out debilitating death from neurological damage or blood clotting. The testing has not been long enough to know the severity of these long-term risks, nor did the testing include the criteria demanded of gene therapies, which is what these so-called “vaccines” are.

And now mid-term results are showing that the vaccines increase risk of severe disease, as reported by CDC Director Dr. Walenksy.  So, yes, our military need to be very concerned about mandatory inoculation.

To those on the front lines of health care who know the truth about what the jabs really do: You must come forward now.  Otherwise, you could later be found complicit in an attack against the U.S. military, which is what this mess has now become.  The lies and deceptions need to stop NOW.

There are reports already coming out about how adverse events are not being reported as required*, how systems have been manipulated to prevent reporting of adverse events*, how fake science was generated to discourage use of effective available treatments, how numbers were manipulated by faulty tests to create the pandemic in the first place*, and how the so-called COVID-19 patients have not only been denied effective treatment but have also been given dangerous treatment, all for the purpose of guaranteeing future funding for vaccines.  And links to most of this information are somewhere on this site.  Fraud vitiates everything, including liability protections.

The other option would be to prove by the deadline that authorization to grant the waiver belongs to someone else.

Good luck!

On a side note, I find it interesting and disturbing that 21 U.S.C. § 564 which governs EUAs is not accessible to the public.

* I will be strengthening the coverage of this topic on this site in the coming days.  For now, the work of the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss (Corona Committee Foundation) is a good place to look for this information.  This group has been taking depositions for over a year now.

Comments are closed.