822 Comments

and who said these mandates were constitutional? I strongly disagree with the premise of this article and this argument.

any and all mandates violate at least 6 international agreements on informed consent which we are constitutionally responsible to uphold as law. for example, article 6 of the UNESCO declaration of 2005 states:

"1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned 𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐧 without disadvantage or prejudice. "

the rights to autonomy and informed consent are also detailed in US law in title 45 part 46, title 21 parts 312 and 314, title 16 vol 2 sect 1028-116, and the patients' bill of rights. each of those promise each individual patient's final right of refusal.

I am starting to become a bit suspicious of Siri at this point.

Expand full comment

Sorry to post so late to this but who said I had to obey the 'constituion?'

I certainly did not sign the document/contract, I am not the posterity of the signatores....Just how am I obligated to the terms of this contract, its agents, officers, elected, appointees, oath takers...etc....etc....

Lets face it the words of other men centuries before me written on paper cannot guide me (or you) nor does it give another authority over you when the creators of said document are dead, expired as is their contract/constituion.

Government is nothing more than a tool that a very few use to keep the great many down....been this way FOREVER. The political ideology of the 'Government' matters not for they ALL employ "collectivism" and "enFORCEment" and who likes to be collectivized or have force used against them?

Anybody with a shred of ability to think should be able to see this fraud, scam, deception that is government.....For the rest its hard because it is centuries long scam (The big lie) that people cannot come to the conclusions that Government is wrong, immoral, secretive, violent, destructive and most of all a LIE.

There is no bigger gang so when Steve says vaccine mandates are constituional know that Steve is on THAT side of this tyranny.

I mean Rockefeller Medicine Men want you to believe Vaccine Mandates are constituional, doctors and lawyers want you to believe that vaccine mandates are constituional, so to does Big Pharma/Medical Industrial Complex and the US Government Gangs lettered agencies, bureaus, departments and their enFORCEr's and lets not forget all the NGO's ALL want you to believe mandates are constituional.

Yes Steve you have imugned the covid vaccine narrartive, but not the system of capitalistic medicine known as allopathy that brings these pandemics, and the dangerous, toxic, unhealthy, expierimental death causing vaccines that have ZERO to do with HEALth.

Whoever said, "take medicines, drug, vaccines for good HEALth"

No one that is who.....

The timeline of vaccines can be questioned, rebuked, repudiated and impugned from their very beginnings.

Expand full comment

The Constitution & Bill of Rights if actually followed, Protects you & gives you FREEDOMS. It’s criminal that this tyrannical government does not follow it & in fact subverts it daily.

Expand full comment

"This tyrannical Government"

Hello????

The founding fathers were British americans who helped install the british system of finance and law that we have today.

The so called founders did not give you freedom, because freedom is not theirs to give.........only take and that is what has occured on this land known as america.

Expand full comment

I beg to differ.......

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist" ------Lysander Spooner -The Constituion of No Authority

Expand full comment

Follow Lex Greene, writer with a serious background… https://newswithviews.com/unity-101-e-pluribus-unum/

WHERE IS THE UNITY OF PEOPLE doing things that matter to restore our Constitutional Republic???

Expand full comment

"our"

could you explain how a contract that you did not sign and are not obligated to became yOURs?

This is like you obligating yourself to the terms of a contract you did not sign, does that not seem bizarre to you?

Expand full comment

Follow Lex Greene, writer with a serious background… https://newswithviews.com/unity-101-e-pluribus-unum/

WHERE IS THE UNITY OF PEOPLE doing things that matter to restore our Constitutional Republic???

Expand full comment

Follow Lex Greene, writer with a serious background… https://newswithviews.com/unity-101-e-pluribus-unum/

WHERE IS THE UNITY OF PEOPLE doing things that matter to restore our Constitutional Republic???

Expand full comment

Follow Lex Greene, writer with a serious background… https://newswithviews.com/unity-101-e-pluribus-unum/

WHERE IS THE UNITY OF PEOPLE doing things that matter to restore our Constitutional Republic???

Expand full comment

Congress needs to make it clear…no mandates under any circumstances!

Expand full comment

There is a “ Bivens” court case from Supreme Court 1971, that basically gives permission to sue the government if...

1) the government actions were intentional and not negligent.

2) the government action not only harmed a person, but also violated their constitutional rights.

And:

3) those constitutional rights are “ clearly established”, and beyond debate.

Check, check & check!

Let’s get to it people!

At least mention this case to the judge.

Expand full comment

Yes sue the government in government courts, with government judges and government lawyers?

Also there are no constituional rights?

What you mistakenly believe are rights (for the people) are actually rules for the government, its elected, appointees, oath takers, officers, agents to obey....

Expand full comment

I see it more as a basic human rights & ethics issue. I do not believe that any human can force another human to take a medical intervention if they do not want it - period. Doesn't matter what the reason. If the authorities feel the need to 'protect people' then they can bring in other measures that do not involve forcing people to take a medical intervention. It's not right.

Expand full comment

Everything Government does is enFORCEment, so whatever measures they use FORCE will be involved....This is what Government does.

If Government did not use FORCE you could not call it Government.

Govern (to control) Ment....mental, mentis (Latin) 'The Mind'

Government = control the mind - it is done by using deception fraud and fear.

Expand full comment

It was glorious to watch a respectful and intellectually stimulating debate for a change. Unfortunately, it seems the dean’s arguments didn’t really address whether vax mandates are constitutional. He simply argued that the courts have repeatedly affirmed they are. But their decisions have always relied on an unexamined premise: the assumption that vaxes prevent transmission (and do so without inflicting even greater harm).

He also argued that the courts defer to the government as the most reliable arbiters of truth. Neither argument demonstrates constitutionality; they just describe habits or patterns.

MY QUESTIONS:

1. How do we challenge, in court, an unexamined assumption (that vaxes prevent transmission)?

2. Is there a way to (a) expose and (b) challenge the court’s unexamined assumption that the government is a reliable arbiter of scientific truth (or any kind of truth)?

3. The courts decide cases on hearing expert testimony every day. The judges aren’t experts in those fields, but they hear the arguments brought on both sides, then decide. Why is the vaccine mandate issue any different? If the people rely on the courts to keep govt in check, and the courts defer to the govt for "truth," then haven’t we lost critical checks on power built into the Constitution?

This was the wrong debate, since both parties would probably agree that a mandate for a solution that unequivocally prevents harms to the masses from a communicable disease (without imposing even more risks in the process) would be constitutional. I hope Mr. Siri and others address my questions in future debates or posts. At least the dean agreed the liability protection laws are unconstitutional. And that's a battle more meaningful to pick.

Expand full comment

HA! China is being blamed for the COVIDS virus' and the quackcines A.K.A.

"Fauci's Ouchies." I wonder! How many of us now believe that instead these

were created and developed in a U.S. lab in Fort Dietrich, MD as was the

AIDS virus in the 1980's? If (IF!) this is TRUE what kind of government are

we NOW living under here in this once free America?? Is it now the quiet

"GENOCIDE KILLING OF THE WILLING" with Vaccidents leading to Vaccemetaries?

SURVIVE THEIR POISONS BY STAYING WELL NATURALLY! I post publicly

and freely on MeWe. A natural healing site in EarthClinic.com with personal

testimonies. ETERNAL LIFE BLESSINGS FOR YAHWEH'S SAINTS!

Expand full comment

Justice requires the courts to investigate the facts, not swallow the state propaganda. Otherwise, the law system will be undermined, and then the law itself becomes the enemy of the people.

Where it goes from here is not good and the Pretorian guard will have to shoot people in the street like dogs and take others to torture/death camps. Or use mercenaries.

We've been here before with Central and South American Juntas, death squads and their leaders all trained at the School of the Americas in the US. Some of us knew that this would happen some day because dictatorial systems inevitably bring their ugly behaviour back home. This is precisely why we must always condemn cruelty, murder, rape, human-trafficking, child-trafficking, imperialism and genocides/wars done in our name (but not in our name!) abroad.

We are no different to those poor people abroad in their suffering, and certainly no different in the eyes those at the top of this world. We are ALL expendable to these maniacs.

Andy. 11 Mar. 2023.

Expand full comment

Too many of them have been paid off or threatened.

Expand full comment

Russia is now saying the "GOF" gain-of-function is +40 year old USSA technology, the real stuff done today in CIA-DOD bio-labs is called "Directional Evolution", ergo those going down the GOF rabbit-hole are being fed feces; Like the 'wuhan leak' mis-information GOF is just a alt-msm honeypot;

Forget about "GAIN of FUNCTION" people that is +40 year old R&D managed by retired Fauci detour. Like the recent CIA dis-info chatter about 'wuhan leak' that's all designed to make the herds "Look Over There".

Russia has just released internal documents "Directional Evolution" from Pfizer where they admit that all products of Pfizer are in fact "Biological Weapons"

Turns out that mRNA vax was deployed since 2017 to be a delivery system for bio-weapons; We could of course say 'duh' that but explains the "look over there GAIN of Function BS we see 24/7 on alt-media", when in fact the real Mother of it ALL is "Directional Evolution" this is the top-secret work today, and "GOF" is your grand-fathers biological-weapons;

https://tass.com/defense/1587077

( Tass is the official news source of Russia from the Gov )

Well we all kind of knew all along mRNA was a bio-weapon and we knew that URKAINE had like 19 BIO-WEAPON lab's operating in under CIA-DOD, we also knew that Russia intended to release all the information about the lab's, and now its happening.

"Consequently, Pfizer’s employee(s) admits the fact of conducting ‘directional evolution’ research aimed at gaining competitive advantages and boosting profits,"

Pfizer’s former employee Karen Kingston, who said that the products of the US pharmaceutical company "by definition, are biological weapons"

... So "Gain of Function" was what they're were doing at CIA-DOD with Fauci as leader some 40 Years ago, but "Directional Evolution" is what they're doing today

˜gain of function™ is perhaps one of the most misunderstood in the scientific lexicon. I would like to explain what the phrase means from the perspective of a scientist who has done gain of function research for the past 40 years.

https://www.virology.ws/2021/09/09/gain-of-function-explained/

Expand full comment
Mar 11, 2023·edited Mar 11, 2023

So, basically, the DOD may have released the virus in Ukraine and already had a (vaccine) bioweapon to be used universally and also side-effect treating drugs to be used domestically and for allies? This is a question, not a statement.

Pfizer issued a press release about the side-effect treating drugs a few months ago.

Expand full comment

I read your GOF link. There are videos showing Chinese scientists out of Wuhan working inside the bat caves. They're all laughing and smiling and dressed in shorts and tee-shirts--exposing a lot of bare skin--not at all concerned about being bit. That would seem to eliminate the virus having a natural origin from that location, anyway.

So, you also doubt that the Wuhan lab itself is the Covid-19 point of origin--Ukraine being fundamentally more likely. Some of the alt-media have focused on the Ukraine labs, but not specifically referring to a Covid-19 association.

Expand full comment

No they aren't. The Supreme Court got that wrong just like they did Roe v Wade.

Expand full comment

But so far, a lot of innocent farmers have paid a real price.

Expand full comment

Katherine Watt article: "Legal Walls..."

Based on a 2013 Supreme Court ruling (seeds and mice), we're only one more ruling away from Pfizer owning people who've been jabbed (chattel property). Then Congress would need to pass a bill defining them as "legally identical to natural humans". Same for Moderna, BioNTech, and J&J.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately it's already here. The jabs insert a MAC (Media Access Control) address & can be tracked/read via Bluetooth devices, at least. It has branded you as cattle.

The jabs also alter your DNA/RNA which now makes the vaccinated the property of whichever drug manufacturer's jab you were given. (Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer etc herds)

The PCR "test" (97% false positive so "everyone" has covid, with the remaining 3% unidentifiable) also inserts MAC ID via hydrogel, but presumably not altering the DNA.

Regretfully, Andy. 11 Mar. 2023.

Expand full comment