Jackson’s
case was dismissed in March 2023 and re-filed (Second Amended
Complaint). She is currently awaiting the federal court’s decision on a
second round of motions to dismiss.
I
have followed the progress of Jackson’s case since writing about it in
Spring 2023, but have not written more about her case publicly, for
several reasons including time limitations. Case documents are below for
interested readers.
There
is no legal requirement that any vaccine manufacturer or regulator
assess vaccines for safety or efficacy, and FDA has never established
any safety or efficacy standards for vaccines.
Neither has the US Pharmacopeia-National Formulary.
FDA has also never defined, by regulation, what a vaccine is, or how to physically or chemically identify a vaccine…
I don't think Jackson's qui tam case is going to have the result you're hoping for.
I
think her lawyers have tee'd the case up for the federal judge to
dismiss it for the second time, and thereby reinforce the use of US DoD
military weapon manufacturing contractors (in her case, Pfizer/BioNTech)
operating under derivative sovereign immunity and related
indemnification, to make and distribute intentionally harmful weapons
labeled as vaccines and countermeasures without legal interference.
SCOTUS is on board with the vaccine-mediated cull; they've already addressed it through Bruesewitz v. Wyeth (2011).
What
they called "unavoidably unsafe" products and "unavoidable, adverse
side effects" was simply a deceptive way of describing intentionally
harmful products produced by contractors and US government working
together to achieve a goal they share: sickening and killing a lot of
people, starting with babies, children and expectant mothers, and then
adding general working age and retired adults.
[Another key phrase from Bruesewitz, citing Hurley v. Lederle (1988),
identifies the FDA as a “passive agency,” which is code for
non-regulatory, having no legal authority or historical record of
setting or enforcing standards for vaccine design, identity, safety, or
efficacy.
See Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Sotomayor dissent at p. 21, FN 19. See also,
Scalia opinion at p. 13: “Design defects…do not merit a single mention
in the [1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act] or the FDA’s
regulations. Indeed, the FDA has never even spelled out
in regulations the criteria it uses to decide whether a vaccine is safe
and effective for its intended use.”
FDA
has never established criteria for safety or efficacy, which is why FDA
has never spelled out its non-existent criteria in regulations.]
Pharmas
got a few decades of product sales for products they claimed would
manage symptoms of chronic diseases induced by vaccines.
For the government, it's always been about reducing life expectancy and population.
The so-called medical freedom lawyers are in on the scam too.
They
don't want to see vaccination programs brought to a close, because they
want continued access to attorney fee payouts through the VICP program.
So their goal is just to get Covid vaccines and other countermeasures
(currently funneled into the dead-end CICP program) folded into the VICP
program, keep the vaccination/kill programs running to keep generating a
large pool of potential claimants, and skim off profit from the claims
filed by a small fraction of the maimed and a small fraction of the
survivors of the dead.
No comments:
Post a Comment