Sicilianthing

US Supreme Court Has Ruled that Forced V*****es Are Constitutional
May 21, 2020
Spiro Skouras

Attorney Alan Dershowitz says we have no Constitutional protection against being forcibly v******ted because no one has a right to spread a deadly disease. This issue was decided by the US Supreme Court long ago in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts, in which the Court said the state has an obligation to use force, if necessary, to protect the lives of its citizens against the threat of a deadly disease. [This is a proper position, because the defense of life is one of the few proper functions of a just state. That is why we warn our activist friends not to overdo their claim that shutdowns and forced v*****es violate their constitutional rights. If their lawsuits ever get into the courts, they will lose.

The problem is that this position is justified only if the deadly threat is real and not staged as a political ploy, and those who are staging the h**x are the ones who will decide that it is real. Those who challenge them will be imprisoned for spreading false information that endangers public health and safety. Furthermore, in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts the Court said the threat doesn’t even need to be real if those making the decision believe it is. That part of the ruling provided a loophole big enough to drive a truck through because it allows political criminals to escape punishment simply by claiming they had bad advice.

So forget the Constitutional argument, folks, and focus on increasing public awareness of the facts and indignation over betrayal by those who we have trusted. Nothing short of a tsunami of public indignation will spare mankind from forced v*****es. If you want to help us in this undertaking, click here.]
By: -GEG (G. Edward Griffin)
Full Story: http://redpilluniversity.org/welcome/

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

That's why I'm not allowing it. I will live free or die with 27 other guns backing me up.

woodguru

You don't even know what free is, you probably believe a store telling you have to wear a mask is violating your rights, but what about a proprietor's rights that doesn't want to make a cake for a gay person?

You, as a free person with rights, standing in front of a store that says you have to wear a mask to enter, are still a free person to do wh**ever you want, you can put a mask on of your own free will, or walk away and find another store that doesn't care about it's customer's and employees health and safety. I, as a free person am free to walk away from a store that doesn't make people wear masks and find one that does.

Trump would love to be able to force people to take this v*****e if he manages to have a short cut version jammed through, because there will be more that don't want it than do. It's impossible to be able to trust anything Trump puts his influence on these days.

Sicilianthing

>>>

I’m with you Lt., if the Founders were here they would have Shot the Judges Dead Dead Dead by now!

Sicilianthing

>>>

I don’t have to make an EFFING cake for a sodomite or
Wear a mask or
Take anything from anyone if I choose...

Flat Out!!!

davezant

No, I will not comply! No forced v*****e for this boy.

BigBadBob Loc: Florida Panhandle

Never before in the history of our country have I seen so many Americans willing to give up their freedom and so many Democrat tyrants willing to take it.

Sicilianthing

>>>

That’s right Bob.

maryjane

Even in the worst years of the flu, we have never been forced to get the flu shot. Even though every flu season, they push their recommendation hard, it is still our decision. I am 80 years old and have never had a flu shot and I have no intention of getting a v*****e for this v***s, as long as there us so much untrustworthy information about this v***s and about the v*****e. Anyway, is there any reason to think that the next time a v***s shows up, it will be exactly the same? Much more likely is that the next one will be, like the flu, a different strain, not affected by the available shot. Not for me. I'll just take my chances. I have always been grateful for the v*****es that actually prevent diseases such as measles, mumps and polio, but I have never put flu in the same category as those things.

maryjane

Maybe so, but, for me, it is just as difficult to trust all the scaremongering and wishy washy so-called experts we have heard so much from.

Sicilianthing

>>>

I guess and we’ll see what happens when they try to tie me down and give me one...people will end up DEAD, DEAD and more DEAD !

Martin Holmes

Jacobson v. Massachusetts is a 1905 case. Since then we have had N**i medical experiments, the Nuremberg Code, and the U.N. Covenant on Civil / Political Rights. The Nuremberg Code is about "informed consent" to medical experiments, as is the U.N. Covenant.

RFK Jr. shows that no v*****e is "certified safe". If not certified safe then it is experimental. If it is experimental then the Nuremberg Code / U.N. Covenant apply - but neither is enforceable in courts of the U.S.

However, the Nuremberg Code is codified in U.S. law at: Title 45 Code of Federal Regulations Part 46.
You will find it at 45 CFR 46.116 - Informed Consent. Read it for yourself.

If you have informed consent then you have informed refusal. "Just say no". Or better, "no thank you".

Sicilianthing

>>>

All of the above is unconstitutionally spawned and deployed since we have ZERO Business ever being enjoined into a foreign body politic called the United Nations or any other collective which ALL Violate our Sovereignty from the onset.

But, the Stupid Sheeple are Stupid still and the beat goes on under Trump’s ignorance too...

Tick Tock Donald !

Tug484

That sucks big time!

Sicilianthing

>>>

It is posted to wake everyone up.
Share it with all your community and get them to take actions against their scumbag T*****r officials.