From: frankferg@aol.com
Date: 2009-08-09 20:34:24
How about letting the people decide. Oh, and by the way – For the benefit of the research challenged medical reporters – since vaccines are claimed to be so safe, why can’t the vaccine manufacturers get liability insurance for their vaccines? Just a thought In a message dated 8/8/2009 3:24:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ad.johnson@ntlworld…. writes: Here is a thread of correspondence with regard to mandatory vaccination – which includes points from Jane Burgermeister and others. I think it boils down to “who will enforce mandatory vaccination” and “who will decide when they think it is necessary”? These questions cannot easily be answered, it seems. Penny is right. We must declare some victory on this Dr Fauci statement publicly made on CSPAN, America’s largest government run congressional TV news channel.Penny as for the “UN Human Rights Covenants”, yes we still have the task of picking those out, holding them up to show how foolish and unconstitutional they are, and having them amended. That can be done with civil lawsuits like the one I filed in federal court. We do have a powerful victory as of yesterday, and it is a good one.On August 7, 2009 Dr. Fauci, director of the NIAID, publicly stated “‘THERE WILL BE NO FORCED FLU VACCINATIONS”This is a strong victory, gaining momentum in the people’s favor
:)The preliminary injunction I filed in US District court also seeks to order the federal govt to make sure a person who refuses the flu vaccine is not discriminated against or denied any services or similar. See, thats one way the forced vaccinations have been occurring, by telling people “Well you aren’t forced to take the vaccine, but if you refuse it then you cannot attend school” or something similar.The injunction I presented to the court, if ruled on favorably, will prevent this from happening. :)This preliminary injunction can be seen here www.safetyla wsuits.com/ prelim-injunctio n.htmlTimLawsuit wsuits.com============ ========= ===Federal Rules of Civil . cornell.edu/ rules/frcp/ On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Penny Bright
2) HOWEVER! Despite the SIGNIFICANT breakthroughs which have been achieved – it is definitely not over. The legal relationship between international bodies, such as the WHO, with International Health Regulations 2005, and domestic law in individual nation states is something that I am still not clear on. I know that with International UN Human Rights Covenants etc, they have to be incorporated within NZ domestic legislation. a) I suggest we do some more research and investigation on that point. At the moment – there is a significant difference of opinion between Jane and Tim on this issue. Let’s all take a deep breath here folks, and ‘seek truth from FACTS’ . HOW CAN WE BEST GET THIS ‘LEGAL POINT’ ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL WHO ‘HEALTH REGULATIONS’ AND INDIVIDUAL NATION STATE’S DOMESTIC LEGISLATION SORTED? ANY IDEAS? Remember! We ARE winning folks! On that cheery note! Take care everyone. Planet-saving can be a FULL-ON stressful time
Don’t forget to make some time to EAT and SLEEP! xxxx Penny On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Legal Team