The lawsuit recently won which challenged the EPA's Fluoride limit was brought under the 2016 Chemical Safety Act I'm told. The law gives The People the right to challenge the EPA's rules and there should be a similar drug law if there isn't already. If there were, then we would have the opportunity to present our best evidence in court …
The lawsuit recently won which challenged the EPA's Fluoride limit was brought under the 2016 Chemical Safety Act I'm told. The law gives The People the right to challenge the EPA's rules and there should be a similar drug law if there isn't already. If there were, then we would have the opportunity to present our best evidence in court that the jabs are injurious. The court then would evaluate the science instead of a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats. Of course, the opposition to such a move would be orders of magnitude higher than the fluoride fights due to the money involved and the threat it would pose to the bio-security industrial complex's agenda. What would be our best evidence? Surely nothing that depended upon assigning cause of death, such as CFR, since that's such an arbitrary and easily manipulated designation, right?
The lawsuit recently won which challenged the EPA's Fluoride limit was brought under the 2016 Chemical Safety Act I'm told. The law gives The People the right to challenge the EPA's rules and there should be a similar drug law if there isn't already. If there were, then we would have the opportunity to present our best evidence in court that the jabs are injurious. The court then would evaluate the science instead of a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats. Of course, the opposition to such a move would be orders of magnitude higher than the fluoride fights due to the money involved and the threat it would pose to the bio-security industrial complex's agenda. What would be our best evidence? Surely nothing that depended upon assigning cause of death, such as CFR, since that's such an arbitrary and easily manipulated designation, right?