Required Covid-19 Vax..

[rmarion]

And you do not agree with this demand..

WE might have some legal assistance..

 

[squeezer]

Its a mailing list for idiots... Bet the email goes strait to somebody selling survival meals and gold.

 

[Wizard29]

Its a mailing list for idiots... Bet the email goes strait to somebody selling survival meals and gold.

So you signed up already?

 

[boatdoc55]

So you signed up already?

Ya, I saw his name on the top of the list!!

 

[regor]

Its a mailing list for idiots... Bet the email goes strait to somebody selling survival meals and gold.

You moonlighting Squeefer?

May I suggest Nick Cuckhen?

Bring it Vaxfags!!!

 

[94Nautique]

Its a mailing list for idiots... Bet the email goes strait to somebody selling survival meals and gold.

Leftism is not liberal. Thanks again for helping make that point.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

should be solid HIPAA privacy case, or cases...or class action. too broad a brush fails every time.

 

[squeezer]

In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court confronted a state law that allowed local governments to require smallpox vaccinations when the local health authorities deemed them necessary. Cambridge resident Henning Jacobson balked at his city's vaccination requirement and was fined $5. He contested that penalty and took his case all the way up to the highest court in the land.


What was Jacobson's legal argument? In the words of the Court, Jacobson "insists that his liberty is invaded when the State subjects him to fine or imprisonment for neglecting or refusing to submit to vaccination; that a compulsory vaccination law is unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive, and, therefore, hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best."

​

The Supreme Court rejected that argument. The 7–2 majority opinion, written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, agreed that the "power of a local community to protect itself against an epidemic threatening the safety of all might be exercised in particular circumstances and in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public, as to authorize or compel the courts to interfere for the protection of such persons." But this case, he concluded, did not rise to that standard. The law was ruled to be a reasonable regulation.


"Whatever may be thought of the expediency of this statute, it cannot be affirmed to be, beyond question, in palpable conflict with the Constitution," Harlan held. "Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the State to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety."


It would be one thing if Jacobson's health or medical history put him at risk of severe injury or death from the vaccine. To force such an individual to be vaccinated "would be cruel and inhuman in the last degree," Harlan acknowledged. But Jacobson "was himself in perfect health and a fit subject of vaccination." The requirement was therefore constitutional as applied to him.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

You moonlighting Squeefer?

View attachment 1005878

May I suggest Nick Cuckhen?

Bring it Vaxfags!!!

to 'turn' on the unvaccinated would be a stupid error. much better to take serum samples from them, copy the antibodies characteristics
Natural human immune response may not be protecting against the spike...it may develop protection against some other characteristic of the COVID-19 virus.
compare the unvaccinated natural immune reponse to those from the vaccinated, as research for possible improvement to man made vaccine(s)

 

[was thatguy]

Hey dumbfuck, what was the mortality rate for small pox in 1905?
I’ve read it was 17% overall in earlier centuries.
You do know that your bat flu is about 1% or less...right?

 

[Backlash]

In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court confronted a state law that allowed local governments to require smallpox vaccinations when the local health authorities deemed them necessary. Cambridge resident Henning Jacobson balked at his city's vaccination requirement and was fined $5. He contested that penalty and took his case all the way up to the highest court in the land.


What was Jacobson's legal argument? In the words of the Court, Jacobson "insists that his liberty is invaded when the State subjects him to fine or imprisonment for neglecting or refusing to submit to vaccination; that a compulsory vaccination law is unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive, and, therefore, hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best."

​

The Supreme Court rejected that argument. The 7–2 majority opinion, written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, agreed that the "power of a local community to protect itself against an epidemic threatening the safety of all might be exercised in particular circumstances and in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public, as to authorize or compel the courts to interfere for the protection of such persons." But this case, he concluded, did not rise to that standard. The law was ruled to be a reasonable regulation.


"Whatever may be thought of the expediency of this statute, it cannot be affirmed to be, beyond question, in palpable conflict with the Constitution," Harlan held. "Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the State to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety."


It would be one thing if Jacobson's health or medical history put him at risk of severe injury or death from the vaccine. To force such an individual to be vaccinated "would be cruel and inhuman in the last degree," Harlan acknowledged. But Jacobson "was himself in perfect health and a fit subject of vaccination." The requirement was therefore constitutional as applied to him.

I would give some leeway if the "Covid 19" vaccine was an actual vaccine and we were truly in dire need to vaccinate the entire country. Neither of those is the case here, so I don't think Jacobsen v. Mass. would necessarily apply.

 

[squeezer]

I would give some leeway if the "Covid 19" vaccine was an actual vaccine and we were truly in dire need to vaccinate the entire country. Neither of those is the case here, so I don't think Jacobsen v. Mass. would necessarily apply.

That could be the case... But the legality of an employer requiring proof of vaccination is certainly NOT an open and shut case.

 

[Christopher Lucero]

so two possibilities: at will employment laws vs patient privacy laws. or collective bargaining vs public health.

whichever way a barrister's route to funding a vacation home build project.

 

[squeezer]

Hey dumbfuck, what was the mortality rate for small pox in 1905?
I’ve read it was 17% overall in earlier centuries.
You do know that your bat flu is about 1% or less...right?

Whats the mortality rate for Small Pox these days?

 

[regor]

That could be the case... But the legality of an employer requiring proof of vaccination is certainly NOT an open and shut case.

Newsflash...............NOTHING is an open and shut case when dealing with you mentally challenged leftists Squeefer!!!

 

[regor]

Whats the mortality rate for Small Pox these days?

Small Pox isn't a coronavirus.....................but it was another good try Squeefy!!!!!

 

[was thatguy]

Whats the mortality rate for Small Pox these days?

It wasn’t the 1905 vax that wiped it out...lol
It wasn’t declared eradicated until like 1980?

My point is that the mortality rate of smallpox dictated action, the mortality rate for Covid is not of that nature...at the risk of sounding insensitive.
You guys seem to skip over that part a lot.
There are a lot more deadly afflictions than the ‘Rona, and we aren’t legally compelled to do anything about those.

 

[rmarion]

Its a mailing list for idiots... Bet the email goes strait to somebody selling survival meals and gold.

ICAN vs. HHS: Key Legal Win Recasts Vaccine Debate

/PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has admitted that, in direct violation of Federal law, it failed to provide a single...

www.prnewswire.com

 

[SBMech]

In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court confronted a state law that allowed local governments to require smallpox vaccinations when the local health authorities deemed them necessary. Cambridge resident Henning Jacobson balked at his city's vaccination requirement and was fined $5. He contested that penalty and took his case all the way up to the highest court in the land.


What was Jacobson's legal argument? In the words of the Court, Jacobson "insists that his liberty is invaded when the State subjects him to fine or imprisonment for neglecting or refusing to submit to vaccination; that a compulsory vaccination law is unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive, and, therefore, hostile to the inherent right of every freeman to care for his own body and health in such way as to him seems best."

​

The Supreme Court rejected that argument. The 7–2 majority opinion, written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, agreed that the "power of a local community to protect itself against an epidemic threatening the safety of all might be exercised in particular circumstances and in reference to particular persons in such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public, as to authorize or compel the courts to interfere for the protection of such persons." But this case, he concluded, did not rise to that standard. The law was ruled to be a reasonable regulation.


"Whatever may be thought of the expediency of this statute, it cannot be affirmed to be, beyond question, in palpable conflict with the Constitution," Harlan held. "Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the State to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety."


It would be one thing if Jacobson's health or medical history put him at risk of severe injury or death from the vaccine. To force such an individual to be vaccinated "would be cruel and inhuman in the last degree," Harlan acknowledged. But Jacobson "was himself in perfect health and a fit subject of vaccination." The requirement was therefore constitutional as applied to him.

Yea well they are all dead now, those early justices were fucking morons. Complete puppets of the almighty dollar and politics.

Go ahead, try to enforce mandatory vax. It will go over as well as house to house firearms confiscation would.

Idiot.

 

[JBS]

Whats the mortality rate for Small Pox these days?

Less than 1% difference than Covid 19[emoji51]

With your logic the Covid “vaccine” will eliminate Covid. Nope


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[rmarion]

 

[Danger Dave]

UK Govt Tracked Millions of People to Study Post-Vaccine Movements

The British government secretly surveilled the movements of millions of citizens to track their movements after receiving a Covid vaccine.

www.breitbart.com

 

[just_floatin]

 

[94Nautique]

It wasn’t the 1905 vax that wiped it out...lol
It wasn’t declared eradicated until like 1980?

My point is that the mortality rate of smallpox dictated action, the mortality rate for Covid is not of that nature...at the risk of sounding insensitive.
You guys seem to skip over that part a lot.
There are a lot more deadly afflictions than the ‘Rona, and we aren’t legally compelled to do anything about those.

As well, no one under the age of 18 dies from the ‘rona. When a disease threatens our breeding stock, we take serious actions. Covid kills the old and infirm, hence the reason China created it in the first place. Squeegee can’t comprehend these facts much less the implications.

 

[rmarion]

 

[RitcheyRch]

 

[TeamGreene]

View attachment 1006079

When in fact the first step towards being a free thinking American is to take the face diaper off. They haven't done shit to curb the virus anyway.
"IT'S SCIENCE I TELL YOU" What a complete crock of shit.

 

[76sanger]

Why would you get this shot? It is still listed as "experimental", the pharmaceutical companies have no idea what the long term consequences are going to be of this. This shot is not going to eradicate this particular Corona virus, nor is it going to keep people from getting the virus. Has the flu shot eradicated the A and B strain virus for the flu? No! Does it keep you from getting the flu? No! Does it help in making the symptoms less? From what I'm told sometimes.
I see a big push from the "big controlling government" and its liberal agenda pushing cronies to get "the people" vaccinated to make you think they (government) are who will take care of you. Government is not looking at science and facts for this virus, they are pushing people into communism, that's the facts! This has been a perfect 1935 through 39 hitler natzi propaganda media machine pushing everybody into believing that we cannot take care of ourselves. That we need (Big Government Daddy) to help us. The scary part is for the last at least 25 years big government schools has pushed this thought into our kids brains. Schools now and the agenda driven teachers are no longer being subtle about it. This is and outright "WAR" for democracy and liberties for (freedom of choice).

 

[Ziggy]

There are a lot more deadly afflictions than the ‘Rona, and we aren’t legally compelled to do anything about those.

The carcinogens and seriously fugged up chemicals in manufactured cigarettes are a huge health factor. Be way safer to mow your lawn and roll it up in some zig-zags.

 

[JBZ]

Dear Patriots,



Are you being bullied, harassed or mandated by an employer or a university to get a vaccine for Covid-CCP (Chinese Communist Party) Virus?



We will be presenting tips on how to deal with this situation. While we understand this is a controversial issue, we believe strongly that NO ONE should be forced, against their will, to be vaccinated. There should be no repercussions from refusing the vaccine for a virus that has a 99% cure rate.



Here are a few points. We especially wish to point out that the vaccine makers have been totally released from any liability if there is a negative side effect or death from the vaccine. BUT, note that if your employer or your university is forcing this on you, THEY have the potential of being held liable. It might be worth telling them about that!



Here are things to consider before you make an decision:
1) There are NO licensed COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S.
2) Emergency Use Authorized (EUA) only - don't believe "approval" means "licensed."
3) Your Option to Refuse is based on Federal law over EUAs.
4) Your Right to Informed Consent based on Federal law over EUAs.
5) There are NO long term studies of side effects.
6) Side effects unknown because there are no PRIOR approved mRNA vaccines in the U.S.
7) Short term evidence of severe side effects and death.

8) If you have had Covid-CCP you have immunity.
9) All vaccine makers have been totally released from ALL liability for any side effects or death.

10) There is liability potential on employers who mandate the vaccine if there are side effects or death.



Here are links to pdf forms to print out and give to your employer or to a university where your children may be attending. It makes sure that they are on record as providing the answers to questions surrounding the vaccine and potential after effects.



Form_Employees_Whose_Employers_Are_Requiring_Covid-19_Injections.pdf



Form_Students_Attending_College_Or-Universities_Requiring_Covid-19_Injections(1).pdf



These forms come from Solari.com, Catherine Austin Fitts website and were compiled by Corey Lynn www.coreysdigs.com



Look for more information about this and the forced wearing of masks. If you are dealing with these issues and would like to talk to a member of Team Kraken, send an email here and we will review it. [email protected]



For more information, please go the Defending The Republic website: https://defendingtherepublic.org/covid/

______________________________



1-The official "experts' claim this reaction is rare, and it may be. But that does not matter when it is you or someone you love hospitalized with heart issues due to the Covid vaccine! Remember, if you have had the Covid-CCP Virus you have immunity and most likely do not need to be vaccinated. In fact, there is scientific evidence that your own immunity is better than the vaccine.



These heart issues are short term side effects. There is absolutely NO infomation anywhere on the long term effects.



https://www.theepochtimes.com/18-cases-of-heart-inflammation-after-covid-19-vaccination-reported-in-connecticut_3829797.html?utm_source=sharenewsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-05-25-1

18 Cases of Heart Inflammation After COVID-19 Vaccination Reported in Connecticut
QUOTE: A single state has recorded 18 cases of myocarditis in people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. All of the cases in Connecticut required hospitalization.
Acting Health Commissioner Dr. Deirdre Gifford told reporters during a virtual press briefing on Monday that the cases have been "rare" and "mild."
But she added later when asked how many of the patients were hospitalized, "All of the cases that were reported to us were individuals that were hospitalized, the vast majority for a couple of days."



________________________________

2- On Monday, Sidney and Team Kraken filed a Motion to Dismiss



On Monday, May 24, 2021, Sidney Powell, Sidney Powell, P.C. and Defending the Republic, Inc. filed a joint Reply Memorandum in Support of their Motion to Dismiss Dominion's Case against them in DC.

This filing reiterates to the Court that there is no jurisdiction over any of these defendants, that venue is improper, and that the case should be dismissed for failure to state a defamation or deceptive practices claim. Dominion cannot prove the essential elements of its claims as a matter of law. Actual malice is a legal impossibility here.

As Sidney Powell said:
"Today's filing is yet another opportunity to demonstrate to the DC Court why there is no jurisdiction over me, my law firm, or Defending the Republic, Inc, and why Dominion fails to state any claim against any of the defendants. This case is meritless and should be dismissed in its entirety. We had and have evidence supporting all our statements about Dominion."

A copy of Monday's filing can be found here:

https://defendingtherepublic.org/dominion

___________________________________



Thank you again for your support and prayers. Please share this information with those close to you.

Sidney and Team Kraken

 

[just_floatin]

So let me get this straight, Wuhan bat research was funded with American grant dollars during the Obama Administration. Then in 2017 Dr. Fauci predicted this pandemic during the Trump Presidency. Yet I am the Tin Hat conspiracy guy

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1397591643134517259

 

[SBMech]

The carcinogens and seriously fugged up chemicals in manufactured cigarettes are a huge health factor. Be way safer to mow your lawn and roll it up in some zig-zags.

Hmm...smoking Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium is probably worse....

 

[regor]

Took a couple days to come out, but the truth prevails.