Please Support Our Legal Advocacy Efforts to Stop the Atrocity in the Hospitals and Expose the Fraud Against Humanity

[Advocate2021]

What is "to CC"? Do you mean ordering by credit card

I remember her as her nickname. its carolyn per the email in the instructions that started the thread [email protected]. you email her to order. i think there is no direct link created for the obvious reasons of tracking and censorship of which we are all too familiar.

 

[tankasnowgod]

So hospitals can ignore a Medical directive to not use Remdeathisnear, but not if it says you are allergic to Remdeathisnear? Or is there something special about wearing a bracelet besides it always being on your person?

Have you given such a directive? If you know how to do an administrative process, you could outline your terms, and even the fines and penalties for breaking them. You can make the penalties quite steep, into the millions (or more) for violating the contract.

 

[tankasnowgod]

As I stated prior, we are not living in a society in accordance with color of law at present; so while informed consent is law on the record, in practice hospitals, pharmacies, etc. are getting away with violating it. We are trying to change that and there are also massive criminal legal efforts underway against the perpetrators.

Do you have a specific example of them violating it? I, personally, don't see it. It seems they are indeed getting consent, at least in the vast majority of cases. There is a presumption of consent when a person is unconscious, or unable to respond. I am not familiar with anyone rebutting that presumption, through something like an administrative process, and then the hospital or doctor violating that contract. Of course, it could happen, but I haven't heard about any such incident.

 

[Perry Staltic]

I remember her as her nickname. its carolyn per the email in the instructions that started the thread [email protected]. you email her to order. i think there is no direct link created for the obvious reasons of tracking and censorship of which we are all too familiar.

Oh OK, CC is her nickname. The CB had me confused

 

[Blossom]

Under current circumstances which we contend are illegal and unconstitutional and are intending this will be exposed but is taking time, yes unconstitutional measures are happening. This is why the bracelet was created as it provides more accountability and notice. medical facilities are still subject to accountability for negligent administration of a drug when a known allergy is notices. and also the bracelet is a symbol that as sovereign beings and citizens, we have the right to refuse a treatment- that right should still be in place. many of the victims were not given informed consent - they did not even get the opportunity to refuse. this gives everyone that affirmative opportunity regardless of whether they are prompted and provides much more teeth for liability regarding lack of consent.

I really appreciate this valuable work and your explanation. You 100% have my support & admiration.

 

[Perry Staltic]

Do you have a specific example of them violating it? I, personally, don't see it. It seems they are indeed getting consent, at least in the vast majority of cases. There is a presumption of consent when a person is unconscious, or unable to respond. I am not familiar with anyone rebutting that presumption, through something like an administrative process, and then the hospital or doctor violating that contract. Of course, it could happen, but I haven't heard about any such incident.

I've seen numerous cases in which the patients' orders (consent) were ignored and remdesivir was administered against their will

 

[tankasnowgod]

I've seen numerous cases in which the patients' orders (consent) were ignored and remdesivir was administered against their will

What were the specifics and details? Each case varies. No doubt there are many corrupt doctors and nurses, but how do you know the patient didn't consent, or didn't rebut the presumption of consent?

 

[Perry Staltic]

What were the specifics and details? Each case varies. No doubt there are many corrupt doctors and nurses, but how do you know the patient didn't consent, or didn't rebut the presumption of consent?

I personally don't know, but according to what patients have said on videos their will was ignored. You could probably find some of them on the Former Feds or FLCCC websites

 

[Advocate2021]

Do you have a specific example of them violating it? I, personally, don't see it. It seems they are indeed getting consent, at least in the vast majority of cases. There is a presumption of consent when a person is unconscious, or unable to respond. I am not familiar with anyone rebutting that presumption, through something like an administrative process, and then the hospital or doctor violating that contract. Of course, it could happen, but I haven't heard about any such incident.

most of our victims were never given a prompt to consent via their family members if they were unable to receive it themselves. there are many cases where family members went to court to get an order for ivermectin- some were successful and many were not. We are not operating in a world where the legal system is intact. corruption has infiltrated the judiciary and the system. I can tell you this first hand over the last two years, especially in NY where i am licensed but thankfully not living as of end of 2017. i represented teachers last year and DOE hearings - probably 60 of them- and by the end i was practically screaming regarding the First Amendment and Tiltle VII to no avail. it was as if the constitution had been burnt at the stake. The DOE attorney literally said -Federal law is not the issue here- go to court- and i said" no worries we are." and we have and in many instances the judges have either been corrupted or indoctrinated. Rest assured the constitution of this country is violated daily.

 

[Advocate2021]

I really appreciate this valuable work and your explanation. You 100% have my support & admiration.

thank you so much and for all you are doing as well

 

[Blossom]

Do you have a specific example of them violating it? I, personally, don't see it. It seems they are indeed getting consent, at least in the vast majority of cases. There is a presumption of consent when a person is unconscious, or unable to respond. I am not familiar with anyone rebutting that presumption, through something like an administrative process, and then the hospital or doctor violating that contract. Of course, it could happen, but I haven't heard about any such incident.

I've worked with several patients over the years who were resuscitated against their wishes due to another person unfortunately calling 911 while they were unconscious. Medics and ER workers will always resuscitate when in doubt. My local EMS advises people keep a copy of their advanced directives in a Ziploc bag in their freezer because that's where they are trained to look when called to a person's home.

I also think it's wise to have a trusted person appointed as our medical power of attorney just in case something happens. I've seen people kept alive artificially for years because they didn't plan ahead and their surviving family members couldn't come to an agreement on things. Those situations can be very tragic on many levels.

 

[Advocate2021]

Do you have a specific example of them violating it? I, personally, don't see it. It seems they are indeed getting consent, at least in the vast majority of cases. There is a presumption of consent when a person is unconscious, or unable to respond. I am not familiar with anyone rebutting that presumption, through something like an administrative process, and then the hospital or doctor violating that contract. Of course, it could happen, but I haven't heard about any such incident.

Regardless, our case against Gilead is premised upon consumer protection law and false advertising. its a unique strategy but much more likely to be successful and it circumvents the prep act and all of the immunities put in place for Big Pharma.

 

[Advocate2021]

We also have a givesendgo created . https://www.givesendgo.com/G6GEZ?utm_source=sharelink&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_campaign=G6GEZ

 

[Peatress]

the initiative is managed by Remdesivir

i am not seeing a link there for the bracelet and just texted my colleague. if one has been created i will post but per the original post, there is a procedure there for ordering via email to CC of former feds.

Thanks

 

[tankasnowgod]

I've worked with several patients over the years who were resuscitated against their wishes due to another person unfortunately calling 911 while they were unconscious. Medics and ER workers will always resuscitate when in doubt.

Of course medics and ER workers will. There is a presumption of consent, when unconscious. I'd bet not a single one of those patients gave advance notice to local hospitals, workers, or their employers of their wishes. If they didn't do that before the incident, how would those medics possibly know?

My local EMS advises people keep a copy of their advanced directives in a Ziploc bag in their freezer because that's where they are trained to look when called to a person's home.

Interesting. I have never heard this. Nor does it seem like something someone would do. Why the freezer?

I also think it's wise to have a trusted person appointed as our medical power of attorney just in case something happens. I've seen people kept alive artificially for years because they didn't plan ahead and their surviving family members couldn't come to an agreement on things. Those situations can be very tragic on many levels.

Absolutely agree.

 

[Blossom]

Interesting. I have never heard this. Nor does it seem like something someone would do. Why the freezer?

I asked them and they said it’s the on area of a home that nearly everyone has and that it preserves the paperwork. I don’t know if it’s a national standard.

 

[tankasnowgod]

. I can tell you this first hand over the last two years, especially in NY where i am licensed but thankfully not living as of end of 2017. i represented teachers last year and DOE hearings - probably 60 of them- and by the end i was practically screaming regarding the First Amendment and Tiltle VII to no avail. it was as if the constitution had been burnt at the stake. The DOE attorney literally said -Federal law is not the issue here- go to court- and i said" no worries we are." and we have and in many instances the judges have either been corrupted or indoctrinated. Rest assured the constitution of this country is violated daily.

Obviously, I don't know the details of what you speak, but if you were talking about a Department of Education hearing, I would actually tend to think they were correct in what they said. It was basically a contract dispute, correct? The First Amendment doesn't apply in a contract dispute, as that only restricts Congress from passing laws. And unless they were discriminating against someone because of their race, creed, color, sex, religion or national origin, I don't see how Title VII of the Civil Rights Act would apply, either.

If it's a contract dispute, the Constitution really doesn't apply. You can't sign an NDA, for example, and then turn around, violate that NDA, and then argue that it somehow violated your rights of free speech under the First Amendment.

 

[Advocate2021]

Obviously, I don't know the details of what you speak, but if you were talking about a Department of Education hearing, I would actually tend to think they were correct in what they said. It was basically a contract dispute, correct? The First Amendment doesn't apply in a contract dispute, as that only restricts Congress from passing laws. And unless they were discriminating against someone because of their race, creed, color, sex, religion or national origin, I don't see how Title VII of the Civil Rights Act would apply, either.

If it's a contract dispute, the Constitution really doesn't apply. You can't sign an NDA, for example, and then turn around, violate that NDA, and then argue that it somehow violated your rights of free speech under the First Amendment.

it was religious discrimination. they all asserted bonafide religious exemptions to the covid shot. there was no contract that they signed requiring them to get the shot.

 

[tankasnowgod]

it was religious discrimination. they all asserted bonafide religious exemptions to the covid shot. there was no contract that they signed requiring them to get the shot.

Well, that would be a good argument for a fact trier. Did they ever consent to any other vaccinations? Because that would be one of the biggest obstacles to overcome. If they did consent to vaccinations in the past, you would have to show that this one is different.

Did you ever consider basing the case around Doe vs. Rumsfeld?

Doe v. Rumsfeld, 501 F. Supp. 2d 186 - Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia 2007 - Google Scholar

scholar.google.com

For most of the time the shots have been out, they have been under EUA. Even the "approvals" were done on insufficient evidence, they never completed the initial clinical trials, anyway. All of the authorizations were done based on 2 month interim trial data, the trials were supposed to be complete this month or next. There is no way any of the shots met the FDA's standards. You could bring in things like the VAERS data, showing a huge increase in deaths and adverse events, as well as the Pfizer trial data, which has inconsistencies that are indicative of fraud, and which could have erased any "effectiveness" of the said shots in the trials.

Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—we need more details and the raw data - The BMJ

On 5 February 2021 we published a clarification to this piece. It is available here. Five weeks ago, when I raised questions about the results of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s covid-19 [...]More...

blogs.bmj.com

 

[Advocate2021]

Well, that would be a good argument for a fact trier. Did they ever consent to any other vaccinations? Because that would be one of the biggest obstacles to overcome. If they did consent to vaccinations in the past, you would have to show that this one is different.

Did you ever consider basing the case around Doe vs. Rumsfeld?

Doe v. Rumsfeld, 501 F. Supp. 2d 186 - Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia 2007 - Google Scholar

scholar.google.com

For most of the time the shots have been out, they have been under EUA. Even the "approvals" were done on insufficient evidence, they never completed the initial clinical trials, anyway. All of the authorizations were done based on 2 month interim trial data, the trials were supposed to be complete this month or next. There is no way any of the shots met the FDA's standards. You could bring in things like the VAERS data, showing a huge increase in deaths and adverse events, as well as the Pfizer trial data, which has inconsistencies that are indicative of fraud, and which could have erased any "effectiveness" of the said shots in the trials.

Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—we need more details and the raw data - The BMJ

On 5 February 2021 we published a clarification to this piece. It is available here. Five weeks ago, when I raised questions about the results of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s covid-19 [...]More...

blogs.bmj.com

these shots are distinguishable due to the ties to aborted fetal tissue and the mrna material - those were always part of the basis of the religious objections. And by law, science is irrelevant to a religious objection- it is based only upon the person's sincerely held belief. i can provide Supreme Court cites later when more leisurely. The religious freedom right under the first amendment is still good law.

And yes, i am quite familiar with Rumsfield and worked with one of the attorneys who was instrumental in it on an action on behalf of the military over this covid crap, using Rumsfield as precedent. |Good that you are familiar. Todd Callendar, Esq is the named attorney on the filings- you can find them. I worked with Dr. Jane Ruby on her affidavit for that case which made many of you points re EUA and violations of the FDA of its own regulations and standards.

Unfortunately, due to the level of indoctrination and corruption, the scientific arguments have not yet been fruitful for the legal efforts; thus our navigation of the constitutional law to help people get exemptions and preserve their lives- bandaids but one that helped a lot of people- i have been very successful getting people exemptions with some exceptions such as the healthcare workers in NY where a regulation was passed banning the religious exemption for them. WE filed a federal court class action for them which is going to be appealed from corrupt decision denying it. this is an example where NY has thrown the constitution of this country out the window. We also used the science; but as i said, the indoctrination and fear are huge obstacles despite its truth as you and i know it.

this is why i am very optimistic about the remdesivir class action we are filing based upon California Consumer Protection Law- its more cut and dry because we think we can demonstrate clearly that they misrepresented the drug and there are clear remedies in the CA statutes we are using. This case is my focus at present as, because it is not about the vaccine debate and people's indoctrination and fear around acquiring covid, i think many who cannot wake up to the vaccine fraud can still understand this hospital murder and that once they do, the dominos will begin to fall and the whole enchilada will collapse.