TREASON - www.treason.tube

Brief Overview:

For those who are new to Common Law, this is a brief overview in everyday language, of the purposes and practicalities of living free under Common Law.

What is Common Law?

Common Law is God's Law, the law of the Land, which states in essence that all mankind are born free of the land, and are therefore entitled to live on the land and from the land - without interference.

Basic Lore:

• Harm no one
• Cause no loss
• Live in honour

There can be no crime without a victim.

Where harm / loss or victimisation has occurred, you are entitled to dispute resolution by a jury of your peers. (This is different from our current Maritime Court System - as with a jury, the Judge has no power and is a mediator only.) With a jury, the power lies with the defendants, and judgements are reached by a unanimous decision of your peers.

Living in the Private:

..A global system of debt-bondage has been established by "incorporating" governments, and by programming the people to "act" in the fictional "roles" of "artificial persons", which as legal fictions having no innate productive capacity, are debtors by default, serving as "transmitting utilities" for human energy.

An artificial legal "person" is a dead entity. It is a legal fiction "persona" in the "theatre of commerce", and it is under the foreign Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction, the international "Law of the Sea." On the contrary, you are born into your own sovereign Estate of body, mind, and soul. As a sentient man or woman you live within the sovereign Common Law Jurisdiction, the national "Law of the Land."

The "Common Law" follows "Natural Law", a living system of "right or justice" held to be common to all humans and derived from Nature rather than from the rules of society. In "Natural Law", all people are born equal and endowed with unalienable rights.

Your sovereign jurisdiction, including your inborn Unalienable Rights, cannot be taken from you without your fully informed and willing consent.

Legal "person" "actors" for incorporated governments, banks, and all corporate entities, need to contract with other legal "person" "actors" to extract their "commercial energy"...

The difference between Lawful and Legal:

• Lawful pertains to our Creator God (the Highest Authority) - e.g. Bible based Common Law.
  
  
• Legal pertains to man / government (inferior beings / entities) - i.e. millions of fallible Statute Laws.

An example of how Common Law (lawful) is superior to Statute Law (legal) is found in a marriage:

• Lawful Marriage: A holy union between our God (Creator) / Man (husband) / Woman (wife) - aka Holy Matrimony.
  
  
• Legal Marriage: This is a legal contract between your: Government / Man / Woman / Confused / Motorbike / Donkey etc - aka a legal business transaction with the government.

New Zealand lawyer Liz Lambert spells out to employers and businesses owners that they are responsible to their employees for gene therapy mRNA injection injuries and deaths.

TinyHouse and Offgrid Resources
Liz is lovely! she has been working for us for so long

nz doris
Thank you. Much appreciated for this important information.

Kiwi Liz
thanks for posting Grant - you've managed to pick out the kernel as usual

ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE YOU TO PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT VIDEO YOU'LL EVER WATCH THIS YEAR, PACKED WITH THE MOST COMPELLING VIDEO CLIPS YOU WILL EVER SEE TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE, ALL WOVEN INTO AN EYE-BULGING, HEART-POUNDING EXPERIENCE YOU'LL NOT SOON FORGET! Have you heard of the date?! October 15th, 2021 was the date chosen by the Evil Elites to mark the dawn of a new IRON CURTAIN. All around the world the POLITICAL, CORPORATE and RELIGIOUS ELITES have SYNCHRONIZED THE ENFORCEMENT of employment mandates and health passport systems under the guise of public health. It doesn't matter that the narrative for these measures have been thoroughly debunked. The EVIL ELITES will push forward because they're committed now, BUT THIS WILL BE THEIR FINAL UNDOING! NUREMBERG 2.0 IS FAST APPROACHING! This date was not chosen at random. The full significance of this symbolic act can only be understood in the context of the ancient Roman tradition of the 'OCTOBER HORSE'.

I want to be very clear and unequivocal about one thing right up front: THOSE BEHIND THIS GENOCIDAL SCHEME ARE EVIL TO THE CORE and MOST PEOPLE still haven't realized just how evil these SATANIC BEASTS REALLY ARE! But when finally open their brainwashed eyes, IT'S GOING TO BLOW THEIR MINDS! I'm going to describe how this ends in BRUTAL TERMS! I'm not going to pander to the delusional, and I'm not about to sugar coat it for the masses. THIS VIDEO IS NOT FOR THE 'COMPLIANT'; the sheep who line up willingly in the final hour, because their propensity for self delusion seals their fate sooner than they could imagine. But, for those with EYES TO SEE, this will come as a MESSAGE OF HOPE! The elites' timing is off and THIS WILL NOT END WELL FOR THEM because they are creating the precise conditions that will give rise to the MILITARY TRIBUNALS THAT LAY AHEAD!

The elites HAVE DECLARED WAR on the entire population of Earth and they marked it symbolically by choosing October 15th — THE SACRIFICE OF THE OCTOBER HORSE! But in their arrogance they have committed many grievous errors. Their invocations are corrupt and profane. They have transgressed Common Law, International Law and Spiritual law. THE FORCES THEY HAVE AWAKENED CANNOT BE BENT TO THEIR WILL! They will reap no benefit by invoking the Red Horse. Nor will the black horse ride down the path they have planned, the scales do not find in their favor. Rather than gain power, THEY WILL LOSE EVERYTHING, and this EPIC VIDEO Lays out just how it will all fall into place - FOR US! Get ready for one HELL of a ride down this BOTTOMLESS RABBIT HOLE, Patriots, this is one video that you MUST WATCH & SHARE EVERYWHERE, as it reveals the EPIC TAKEDOWN OF SATAN'S ARMY!

When an Australian man is questioned by police for not wearing a mask at a train station, the man turns on his camera and trolls them.

Hector Gonzalez II
My hats off to Australians fighting back all the foolishness with vaccine mandates. Keep up the good work.

V T
The police are so excited to play out their gestapo fantasies.

Greg Beaudry
The wolves are always surprised when the "sheep" bite back.

purple mander
As a Australian Citizen, thankyou Daily Caller for sharing this, And fuck you youtube censorship for hiding the dislikes !

Matt S
These officers need to be held accountable for crimes against humanity. One day soon they will know justice for their treason

A man at an Australian gym was paid a visit by people who reportedly wanted to conduct a COVID-19 compliance check. Things didn't go the way they thought it would.

Auckland lawyer Liz Lambert tells employers and self-employed to ignore Friday's (3rd Dec) government mandates and explains the reasons why to Grant Edwards.

Partial Transcript:

Liz: "..Now their, their shops up again, because the thing is, and but, the most of, most of what they're worried about Grant is that this threat of a, a $15,000 fine. Well, I'm saying to them, 'Bring it on!' Because the people who will be waiving that fine in the air are people called WorkSafe.

Now this, this WorkSafe, and they can try, and, and sue me for defamation if they want. But they are a criminal organisation. They have been lying to the whole, the whole lot of ah, you know, business owners in New Zealand for the last two years. They have been going around and saying to people that, that your, that your workplace risk is your WORKER!!!

They have no, nothing in the act that says anything like that, that they ever go and recommend anything like masking, or testing, or vaccination to the worker. To the, to the employer. To the PCBU. That in fact, it makes it clear in the Act, under Section (I think it's) 172, that they have a right to ask for a sample from an, or get a sample from a worker, but that is only with the worker's full, fully informed consent. That's a sample right???

So it might be, you know, maybe they use that to get breath testing for alcohol or drugs. It could be something like that say, and they would use it for that because, and they could get informed consent for that because a worker in some industries, especially with heavy machinery, they, they sign in their contract that they will give a sample, you know every, you know, every few weeks, or something, some of them are tested weekly. I think to make sure they haven't been smoking dope, or, or anything else like that, so that they, you know, they're fit to operate machinery. So that would be where Section 172 is in use. But there's nothing in people's contract about masking, or testing, or taking vaccines right? So, so WorkSafe have been acting like there is. And they are very, very hard to get hold of now, now that this has started to come up, and I've started to beat the drum about WorkSafe.

So, yeah, long story short, I think, I think Friday was a red letter day, because it's all out in the open now, and now we can begin to fight properly. Because all of these threats of things about to happen, and, and, and you know, it's all a big build up. It's all a, a smoke screen. It's all a play. It's all an illusion and they've done very well, but now it's time to end, and I'm very happy that we can now, we can now do this.

It's a terrible thing for those people who've been vaccinated, for the people who have killed themselves over this, there is going to be a lot of payback, but WorkSafe is first on my list. Right."

Grant: "John Ansel says that it's, we should be thinking about the punishment for these war crimes, or, or what we'd call it.. GENOCIDE."

Liz: "Mm."

Grant: "Should be thinking about how we're going to punish these people."

Liz: "Mm. And I don't know."

Grant: "It's the death sentence."

Liz: "Yeah. Well it has to be doesn't it? Um..."

Grant: "Yes. A judicial."

Liz: "Mm. For those people who have, you know "malice of forethought"… done this. Yes. I think that has to be the case."

Grant: "Do you think that should include not only politicians, but the media, and also employers?"

Liz: "The media? I don't think the media or the employers know a darn thing about this. I think there's very few people who know it because it's such a dangerous secret."

Grant: "Mm. Well we're doing our best to, to talk about it and Linda Walton from Health Forum NZ. She's got a massive presence, and I think she, before they took her off Facebook, she had 45,000 followers. She's now on MeWe, and they put it, I think it's about 310 deaths with the people's register, and thousands of injuries, and we all know people now. Don't you? Do you? I, I do…"

Liz: "I don't know any people. No. Well living on Waihiki Island. Oh. Although, I'll tell you what, I see a lot of people walking around limping and, and things like that. Um. Yeah. And limping and, and with crutches and, you know, and, and into wheelchairs., and.."

Grant: "With their clots and their blood clots."

Liz: "Yeah. I think so. Yeah, a lot of them on the streets of Waihiki that's for sure."

Grant: "Wow. Well there's a few things I wanted to talk to you about with just a check, check a few more things. Homeschooling? You mentioned home-school. Now do they have to be tested the people that are conducting, that like the parents that are doing home-schooling or do they have to be jabbed?"

Liz: "Well, this is the thing. No. They're talking about testing. But this is the thing, I'd say now, we've ripped the, we've ripped the cloth aside. Nobody has to do anything from here on in. Just stop right there."

Grant: "Okay."

Liz: "Apart from reopen your businesses and get on with the job, because we want to now pull these, these, we now need to get these worms out of their wormholes from WorkSafe..."

During a Wednesday hearing on COVID-19 misinformation, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) criticized YouTube for removing a video containing 'misinformation.' The Ohio Republican said the social media company should not be censoring doctors over 'science.'

Peder Johansen
These people are as evil as people can be. Evil by omitence.

Stocklaw
This is a serious problem, and we need to address it now.

Linda Garcia
Tired of everything being biased online. Stop the censorship.

annie lane
And not showing the dislike numbers because it hurts the MSM feelings

Iain Burgess
Big Brother doesn't need a reason. Power is it's only goal.

Fidelity Quester
A healthy mind does not terrorize others with an agenda to force compliance.

REBELREBEL123
Comon Law over ride's all govenment acts mandates .people can set up their own courts under comon law jurisdiction..all non muslim countrys that britian once ruled like America canada india ect have comon law that supersede government acts and laws..so the comon law that says do no harm and cause no loss is easily proven.

ESTENAVIS
The only problem there is all the snitches. You need false flags of your own.

Protoc
Need some sort of semi respectable organization to arrest otherwise will just get swat teamed. Any assassinations will be skewed as terrorists. Best way is to get behind someone like Louisiana congressman Clay Higgins or other leaders to get the ball rolling.

TPProductions
ok so... arrest them, so we get a bunch of the good old boys from town we grew up with who have like minded ideas that we trust .. I cant think of a damn one, then we go to our local baddies and we slap the cuffs on them when they are least expecting it.. then we take them where? and do what... The local authorities would consider it a kidnapping and call in the swat team.. even if we have a good amount of people orginized the wrong person finds out and the plot gets exposed.. you claim that these people cant figure out what is happening in every town but that just means that you fail to understand how their power structure works. These people are free masons and they have a lodge in every town in america

Silver-samurai
It's not about the little guy it's the veterans militarily and all that swore an oath to defend the constitution. They have to take action.

Kiss-My-Ass
Then the battle goes physical and possibly you good old boys die all together trying or you stay in your house and you die one by one with what is left of your families after they take your children. Just remember the Bolsheviks kill people slowly using starvation and other methods. They never get their hands dirty, that's why they wear gloves. Grey State is coming. Will a lion wait trembling while a hunter circles it? What are we waiting for?

Approximately 6:30pm outside Parliament House

Speech by Krystle - Former acting senior seargent of Victoria Police, well known for quitting during filming of an interview with Discernable.

There were other great speeches last night, and a video of the march is on the way.

Melbourne Ground
Is this a growing phenomenon in Victoria?

Chris Kyle
Fantastic speech, what a brilliant woman. Well done Krystle this fills me with hope.

My opinion today
Don't discriminate towards personal choice. That's a strong statement

Funstuff13613
What a brilliant speaker and so brave too, much respect.

Mary Adrienne Moore or Less
Krystal. We will forever be indebted to you for your positive stance in saving our beautiful state of Victoria. Australia.

Allan Sykes
Let it RIP senior sergeant, hopefully other police are listening hard & stand with us.

ThePaybak
Just give her Dan's job now!

Craig Backman recently resigned as Senior Constable of the Victoria Police. He delivers a powerful speech outside Parliament House in Melbourne in front of thousands of Melburnians.

If you haven't been financially smashed by bureaucratic decisions, Federal and State, please consider shouting me a coffee here: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/samtruearrow

john hopokins
the police need to stand up for AUSTRALIA - not central bankers.

Anton Rodman
Legend! He's not just an ex cop. He's a human with a moral compass, dignity and ethics.

TakeTheRide LiveTheLife
THAT is a MAN WITH COURAGE. I pray that others in the force will find the courage to follow his lead. Thank you sir, for your service!

Christine Preller
Courage is contagious, when a brave man stand, the spines of others are often stiffened - Billy Graham

Angelina Marina
HEROES WILL STAND ,, POWER TO THE PEOPLE to FIGHT FOR FREEDOM,, never give up your POWER,, I'm with you all the way

Helen Egan
"You will never do anything in this world without courage. It's the greatest quality of the mind next to honor". Aristotle

Ken Rasmussen
a brave man , we need more like him.

Escape from Babylon
These police better pick the right side before its too late!

Police and their unions are fighting vaccine mandates all around the US, and it's coming at a time when murders are rising at record rates. Can politicians force police to get vaccinated or will they have to deal with higher crime and fewer police to deal with that crime?

Watch this episode of America Uncovered for more on how cities are handling police and vaccine mandates, what Joe Biden has said should happen to police who don't get vaccinated, and why many say they're not getting vaccinated.

Arise Australia! Riccardo Bosi & Sacha Stone

Leader of Australia One Party Riccardo Bosi's discusses his historic Declaration of Sovereignty which was made to Australian Magistrates this week shortly before the court hung up on him.

All tyrants and traitors who have committed treason in Australia (and New Zealand), are scheduled for execution in the coming months.

From Sue Grey Lawyer 24th Oct 2021 @14:41hrs

To: Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern <jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz>, Hon David Parker <david.parker@parliament.govt.nz>, Hon Andrew Little <andrew.little@parliament.govt.nz>, Hon Chris Hipkins <chris.hipkins@parliament.govt.nz>, <ashley_bloomfield@moh.govt.nz>, Chris James <Chris.James@health.govt.nz>, <ayesha.verrall@parliament.govt.nz>

Dear Prime Minister, Attorney-General, Minister of Health, Minister of Covid, Minister or Seniors, Director General of Health and Chris

I attach below some new and very important research which I must assume your advisors have not yet provided to you, or the experimental Pfizer injection rollout would surely already have been suspended.

It is now clearly established that the S-Protein [spike protein] is a toxin that causes the harmful symptoms known as “Covid”.

I surely don’t need to explain the legal, ethical and human rights consequences of a government knowingly promoting a program which intentionally injects a life threatening toxin into healthy people.

I also attach a report indicating that injected nanoparticles (and the S-Protein) do not remain in the arm muscle but instead circulate throughout the whole body.

The combined effect is that the Pfizer jab injects mRNA to take over cells to manufacture the deadly S-Protein toxin and this spread throughout much of the body, manufacturing the S-Protein toxin for days and in some cases many weeks.

This explains why even the limited available research from the two months of study as summarised in the Comirnaty Data Sheet identifies possible harm to many different parts of the body including the heart, blood, brain, musculoskeletal system, nervous system, fainting and dizziness etc.

This is no longer just a shocking experiment. Everyone involved is now on notice of this “injection roulette” which may result in death or serious injury to previously healthy people. The health and safety implications for employers and those who push this jab, are significant.

No post injection death can legitimately be ruled out as being caused or contributed by the injection, at least not without a full coroner’s report. Certainly any post vax stroke, heart attack, other blood disorder, nervous system disorder or even suicide or car accident (known overseas as “vaccidents”) must prima facie be assumed to be caused or contributed to by the jab, at least until a full coroners report is undertaken.

Similarly it is not good enough to claim that our seniors who die post jab were frail and likely to die. Surely if they were that frail they should have been spared from the jab. Anyway, surely “deaths post Jab” should be treated consistently with “deaths post Covid”.

Despite the secretive, flawed and very passive official post jab injury reporting process (CARM), and as a result of the more active community led follow up, you are already on notice of a number of deaths and life threatening and life changing harm from this injection. The deaths and harm will inevitably continue if there are any further injections. Perhaps initially you had an excuse that you thought the S-Protein was “safe”. However now you are on notice that it is not “safe” by any definition.

Further, although you in privileged position are on notice, many members of the public who you were elected to represent remain deceived by misleading claims in crown propaganda that the jab is “safe and effective”. In these circumstances there can be no “Informed consent”. Each jab without Informed Consent is in breach of the Health and Disability Code and is an assault.

In these circumstances, the ongoing program is surely criminal, and indeed may result in Homicide as defined by the Crimes Act:

158 Homicide defined
Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever.

Compare: 1908 No 32 s 173
Anyone who aids, abets or otherwise incites homicide is a party to that homicide.

I note that the Director-General of Health has shared his view in sworn evidence that Covid is the most serious health issue for New Zealand in 100 years.

I invite you all to consider that claim very carefully and critically. Please put Covid in perspective against the many other challenges which we face, including for example heart attacks, strokes, cancer, suicide accidents and diabetes and the nitrate and other contamination of much of our water.

Surely you must agree that the harm is not from “Covid” but from the “Response to Covid”.

The best expert evidence is that the risk from Covid is similar to the risk from influenza. Many experts are now saying that Covid is simply a rebranding of influenza and colds, supported by PCR testing that was never intended as a diagnostic tool. The WHO says that PCR testing should not be used beyond 20-25 cycles. OIA responses indicate that in NZ PCR tests use up to 45 cycles, which simply multiplies any contamination.

Our government is about to enter a dangerous new phase if it proceeds to inject more healthy New Zealanders with an injection that experts have established is toxic.

Apart from the direct harm to those who choose, or are bullied to accept this injection, there is considerable peripheral harm. This includes the contamination of our Blood Bank with S-Protein. We can only speculate on the risks for vulnerable people who receive blood contaminated with this toxin.

Please stop and reflect. Please listen to international experts who are independent from Big Pharma and who are not invested in the Covid paradigm.

Please listen to the New Zealand scientific and medical experts who have put their careers and reputations on the line out of extreme concern.

Please correct the misinformation that this injection is “safe and effective” and “approved by Medsafe” when in fact it did not meet the statutory criteria that “benefit exceeds risk”.

There is no imminent health risk from suspending the program. Dr Bloomfield’s sworn evidence was that the risks were mainly financial and repetitional.

Please find the courage to challenge whoever is driving this, and any who act on dogma rather than evidence, reason or ethics.

The future of New Zealand depends on your courage to step up and make this critical call for our people. I urge you to listen, engage and act in the public interest.

Please put aside your pride and the dogma, and suspend this program.

I am happy to assist however I can.

Sue Grey LLB (Hons), BSc (Biochemistry and Microbiology), RSHDipPHI
Co-leader NZ Outdoors Party

Transcript from video:

10.08: "..unfortunately in some countries you cannot keep your job without a Digital Green Certificate. You cannot enter public building without DGC. You cannot enter a shop without the DGC.

We are facing, now, on the contrary, more and more evidence, in practice and more and more scientific research and evidence, that people carrying DGC can indeed infect other people. DGC is a license to spread and infect. Unfortunately DGC gives a false sense of security that you see, is completely illogical. It's non-scientific and it must be abandoned.

I fully support the staff of the European Parliament in their positions, the positions of non-discrimination, non-segregation, the freedom to come to the workplace. This is their workplace, along with us, the MPs. The implementation of proportional and adequate sanitary measures. The vaccine not being compulsory..."

11:11: "..free and informed consent, as my colleague said, which are prescribed with various international documents, from Aviator(?) convention; Nuremberg called(?); resolutions of Council of Europe. We have Council of Europe right there, a few meters from this parliament building.

Free and informed consent. A right, which belongs to individual freedoms, to decide whether or not to say yes or no to a medical act of any kind; medical treatment of any kind. A message to the staff is simple, you're not alone; and fight for your rights and we are fighting along with you. Thank you.

11:53: ..Thank you Ivan.

I want to quote something precisely, from the regulation that was voted a few months ago, that imposed, all across Europe, this Green Certificate. The paragraph 46 of that regulation states the following and I quote: 'These regulations respect the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognized in particular by the chapter, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the right to respect for private life and for family life; the right to the protection of personal data; the right to equality before the law and non-discrimination; the right to free movement; and the right to an effective remedy.'

Member states should comply with the charter, when implementing this regulation. This is why it was stated, in this regulation, and this is why we was voted, and what was agreed out of the trial. Well if we look now, a few months after this Green Certificate was imposed in the European Union, we don't, we see EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. All these rights, that allegedly, were supposed to be protected by this regulation, are actually violated right now. People cannot work anymore; and they live under the threat, of losing their jobs and their livelihoods, if they are not having this certificate.

I have a colleague here from Ether. We have about a million and a few hundred thousand Romanians in Italy. Many more Polish. Many more Bulgarians; and other people from Eastern Europe. They are all citizens of this European Union with equal rights. I have to tell you then in the past few weeks, I'm bombarded with petitions, from people in Italy, from people in France, from people in Spain, concerned - that they will be losing their jobs if they don't have this green certificate.

The problem is many of these people already had Covid-19. They have proved that they have the antibodies; the natural antibodies, and nobody cares. They are forced to do, or to be exposed for example, or to take a medical product, that for various reasons, they don't want to take it. If they don't do it, they will lose their jobs! So our concern is, is this the type of European Union, that we want to build, that we want to accept? Is this the European Union as it stated in the city of the European Union, that this union is a space of freedom? Do we still have that freedom anymore or not?

So I was, you know, we were some of the people I would say that raised these concerns, during the debates in the Plenary, when this Green Certificate was debated. At that point, our voice was among in a minority and it's proven by the vote. The problem now is, more and more people in Europe, are affected by the decision made even by this house.

You've seen the protest in Italy and in many other countries. Unbelievably I'm coming from a former Communist countries, from a Communist country, we haven't had a protest for liberty since the fall of Communism. Out of the blue we see people around Romania, and we've seen, you know, interestingly enough, in Spain and Italy and in many other countries, fighting for freedom, for liberty. They're not fighting for higher pensions, for higher salaries, or for any of these other rights. They simply fight for the basic human right - of being free. To decide implicitly what they want to do with their body.

So, this issue was raised by us, it's proven by the records of the parliament. Now it's affecting a lot of people, a lot of our citizens. Now the problem is, that it's affecting all of us here; and it's threatening the parliamentarian democracy even of this house. Because if we will not be allowed to enter this house, unless we have a Green Certificate - we will not be able to - do our job here. But along with us, it's our assistance and our staff members. I have to tell you that, us, and many others of us, were contacted, 'anonymously' you know, or 'off the record' I would say, by many of the staff members, who are deeply concerned.

People that work for this house for decades; they have a family, they have mortgages, crediting banks; and they now, they live with this threat, the sooner than later, if they don't have this Green Certificate, they will be losing the job. But they haven't done anything wrong. This is the, this is the absurd situation. Many of them already went through these insane illness, that killed so many people. They have proved that they developed a natural immunity; and for some reason, unknown reason, illogical reason, non-medically proven reason, they will be faced with losing their jobs, unless they have a Green Certificate.

It is not fair to them. It is not fair to the citizens, of this union and it's not fair to all of us. You know we were elected here to represent our citizens. We have our assistants you know who, are helping, us to serve our citizens, but nevertheless, there are thousands of people, working for the parliament, for the commission, for the council. Without them, we will not be able to do our jobs. They are the unknown people that are actually carrying this, this, everything that we do here and everything that we have here.

And just to stress, to come to work every day, to be threatened, to be afraid, that you might lose your job, because you don't have, a certificate, that is not certifying anything. Because clearly if you are vaccinated, you can get Covid and you can spread the virus. I mean it's proven already; and if you have a negative test, that is just proving that at the moment when you got the test, you were negative. But it doesn't mean when you leave the office, or the testing place, you might not get infected and infect other people.

Interestingly enough, in the parliament, this is the absurd situation, we all agree, that if you have proven of natural immunity, you should be allowed to travel free. They remove that from the regulation, so now healthy people, healthy people, CANNOT exercise their basic fundamental right. So an idea that's, or a regulation that started with the idea in mind, to facilitate, freedom of movement, now it's a, tool I would say, use, to condition your right to work your right to eat, your right to travel, your right to personal life and many other things.

So the reason why, we, had this press conference, is to express through our voices, the concerns of us, the concerns of our staff members and nevertheless, the concerns of hundreds and maybe thousands of people, that are working in the parliament, in the council and many other European institutions.

We are here for you, and we will fight for you."

Points to Remember:

There are a few things to remember and do now:

1. Don't panic
2. Don’t quit your job
3. At this point it is only an announcement on TV - no paperwork has been presented on it
4. Find your employment agreement and read it really well. It is unlikely it includes any clauses requiring you to take a jab
5. Start preparing a timeline or all work related events since you were employed
6. The employer will be required to do an individual risk assessment for you before any decision can be made. (Little risk to a child who is not vulnerable)
7. Avoid one-on-one meetings with the employer - be sure if you do have a meeting to be pre-prepared with a written outline of everything they intend to discuss with you
8. Be sure to get everything in writing
9. Voices for Freedom have Industry groups set up to join for support and possible group court actions
10. Don't do it on your own, make sure you get support
11. Remember that a mandate is NOT law. A mandate requires your agreement to it
12. Remember there are way more out there willing to walk out than they are letting on. The best defence is in numbers

Main Point: Remember that a mandate is NOT law. A mandate requires your agreement to it.

This is the moment Acting Senior Sergeant Krystle Mitchell QUITS Victoria Police.
SHARE THE FULL STORY: http://rebelne.ws/3uYFaW2

Drain Addict
A brave police woman!

Uriels Machine
"In my soul" is the giveaway phrase. She knows how a mere job and a few decades of life under covid does not compare to eternity. Bravo Krystle!

Theodore
May God bless this woman and bring her nothing but prosperity. She's doing the right thing by standing against something she doesn't believe in.

Graeme Willis
VicPol's loss - we need people of integrity like this woman in the force.

Doug
This woman's values are what the world needs right now. Her partner is very lucky to have her!

pastina000
Brave, Honest and Heartfelt words from this young lady, this Officer gives a true description of what the Police have become and that place is no longer for her......So sad the GOOD leave, wish you well.

Thom Vogan
When you enforce laws you don't believe in you stop being a police officer and become a government goon, I have no sympathy for them

Unvaccinated police officers have started to quit the service over the QPS vaccination mandate, which came into effect from today.

Some former officers say those still to be jabbed should 'do what they're told', while others suggest the mandate amounts to 'bullying'.

kickinthegob
Funny how they didn't quit when they were asked to enforce mandates on others but are quitting now that it affects them...

Rebecca Smith
Fully support any officer that decides this therapy is not for them at this stage. Your health is your business

Nick Gordon
Can't believe how thick Greg Early is. For an old bloke, who has lived a priveledged life with all the rights and protections he has had in Australia, to dismiss this as "just do what you're told" is horribly narrow minded and childlike.

Noreen Holtzen
"Listen, but ask questions, and think for yourself" vs "do what you're told". Which society would you like to create?

kjames
The old codger says do what your told, don't question don't think for yourself just do what your told. He would have made a great SS officer.

spongebob grumpy pants
"do what you're told". Grown adults aren't small children. One can only imagine the level of bullying he dished out when he was a serving plod...............

Earl Mcraw
It was ok for these people to enforce it on others, they are the real bullies.

Transcript from video:

I'm Alex Cooney. The last 12 years I've worked as a police officer for the New South Wales Police Force.

Um. In that time, I've always done extra to my duties. Um, when I started, I did the recruit show. I performed extra roles. I'd always relieved higher roles. I'd run operations for police. I'm really pro police. We want police. We need police and that's why I'm here today, to let police know that we need them.

Um, I've had a lot of police come to me, um, worried about what they've been asked to do at the moment. Unfortunately no one within the police can actually speak; um, and that's, that's my role and I'm here to speak for them.

October last year, I wrote a letter to the Police Commissioner, because I was worried that what we're doing was unjustified and unlawful and it was eroding the police relationship with the community. We're becoming divided, as becoming police first - then citizens. People are more scared of getting a fine than they are of an alleged virus. That was an evidence-based letter I wrote. It shows that what we're enforcing, that was not justified. Covid is not what we've been told it is; on top of that we were breaching laws.

Covids not about health, it's about control. It's everything other than health you know. You know health's about you connecting, it's about being outside, it's about your interactions. Um, it's not about isolation. So I felt someone within the police needed to bring that up. No one had. I waited a long time before I released that letter. We, er, I was waiting, waiting, waiting and basically got to the point where I couldn't sleep at night, not doing anything.

I approached 'Advocate Me', uh with what I had and asked for their assistance putting a letter together. We came up with a plan that we would make, do an open letter and make it public, because they believed they would be suppressed internally. So my intent behind the letter, was to notify the commissioner and all police in on it; or police within New South Wales, of what we've got and that we may be acting unlawfully. So I sent it via email internally. Now that was suppressed after six hours and taken off, so not a lot of people saw it. But what did happen with Advocate Me making it public, is it caught traction, um a lot of members of the public saw it, um with that we have had literally people come up crying going: "Thank you, I thought there was NO hope..." They were aware of the tyranny that's been imposed on them, and they thought that all police were out to get them.

It hit a point where I had so many police come to me, not knowing what to do, feeling someone needed to say something and I was stuck basically under non-disclosure agreements or gag orders, that I couldn't move on. I couldn't talk to these police. I couldn't talk to members of the community and I couldn't do anything publicly, because of these orders. So I made the decision to resign from the police force with a new set of lockdowns, so that I could actually speak for the police who are still serving.

I couldn't face up as a police officer to enforce this tyranny on the population, knowing what I knew behind it. Therefore what we're imposing upon the communities was unjustified. Further to that, we're breaching laws in imposing these things upon the community, these rules. It was unjustifiable and unlawful and the police were being used as a tool for political and other, other background agendas, to impose on the community.

I felt someone needed to be the tip of the spear, to break that ice. All I wanted to do was plant the seed. The problem with the police and the problem that I'm seeing and the phone calls that I'm getting from police, they don't want to enforce this stuff. They are part of the community, so enforcing this on the community, they're enforcing them on themselves. If they're going to enforce this stuff, you know, they're, they're removing their own freedoms by doing so.

You know most of the police now understand that Covid is not what we've been told it is and they're frustrated with it, they're over it, a lot of them want to actually leave, but again, they're in a situation where they might have a mortgage or something and don't want to. There's a lot, there's a lot of scared police out there at the moment, fearful of where we're headed. I'm fearful of what they've been asked to do, not wanting to do it. That's not why they join the police. They join there to help the community, to be there for members of the community when they need police, that is why, that's what gives them purpose.

This is just creating a divide and the police themselves are feeling isolated and they're really struggling with it. So many are off on stress leave since the Covid, um, it's clear as to what's happening to them.

I've been aware for a long time that, and a lot of police are, that what is displayed on mainstream media is false. Um, it's, it's being able to read mainstream media and say what are they trying to get at, um, and looking deep they're pushing Covid so hard on, on the population. I went the other way and looked underneath and what I found was a whole world of doctors and scientists, thousands and thousands of them, who are putting forward facts that have been ignored. Mainstream media have a lot to answer for, they're pushing this agenda. They're a tool that is - you know they call it programming - there's a reason they call it programming.

I'm not sure where the mandatory vax comes in with the police, what the agendas are behind it. Now this, within New South Wales, it's the commissioner who has deemed it mandatory, that the troops get vaccinated by the 30th of this month. Now, that hasn't come from government; that hasn't come from anywhere else, that's just a commissioner decision.

Most members of the police are lovely, even the high ranking ones. There, there are a lot of police who do not want these vaccines. Um, I have more than 170 New South Wales that I've contact with, who are, adamantly not wanting the vaccine. I'm aware of many many, many others who have already had the first shot, who didn't want it, but they feel like they need the employment. That's complete coercion into having this medical procedure. I put it down to essentially they are being groomed, to be injected. What you need to do as police, is start questioning. You need to start questioning the orders and the directions you've been given. You know, do things honourably. Don't be belligerent. Don't put yourselves in a position if you, if you're worried; but you can ask the questions.

What we're going to do with Advocate Me, is provide interpretations of the legislation, which have been through lawyers, barristers, even police prosecutors, to be solid interpretations of the legislation and the law, that they can then take to their superior. You know they can simply ask, us, if it's a constable ask the sergeant: "Sarge, it's my comprehension of the legislation, that we're acting unlawfully. Can you please follow this up for me?"

You know it's the role of that constable to act lawfully. In doing that you're not going to breach any, any internal policies. You're doing things honourably for the organization. You're not going to get offside. You're not going to um find yourself in hot water; and you're going to have an impact, because that sergeant is going to have to take that somewhere. He's going to have to take it to an inspector or higher up, you know, before you know it you may just cease the whole area from enforcing these rules upon the community. It could be that simple and police just have to, have to start thinking rather than follow orders, start questioning and you know there's nothing wrong with asking the question.

California Police Sergeant David Gutierrez said he decided to turn in his badge so he could speak up against the vaccine mandate for others who cannot.

Esmerelda Carrillo
Praise God, that he is trusting God and has faith, and money is a failure, it comes and goes. Everything will go well him and it will be better, for sure.

Tanesiha Herise Johnson
God will supply his needs give them the word when they asked how you going make it Phil.4:19 Pro.3:1-7 Push back saints and fight the good fight of faith fear Not! In God we trust were Jesus Christ is Lord!

D M
I have so much respect for this gentleman. He is standing up not only for himself but for all of us. God has his seal on you Sir. You did the right thing!!!

Rose Edmonds
Good for him, it is good that he had a pension to fall back on, sadly not everyone is in that position. It is so unfair. God will surely provide for those who put their faith in Him.

Nancy Sample
Thirty years isn't easy to give up but the fact you did shows your boldness and courage. Just know you are not alone and have support and prayers backing you.

Wesley Bearer
he said "I have faith and I feel God is leading me this way and WE WIN IN THE END" Amen

Manuel Di
May the Lord bless this man, and his family, and his decisions! The reporter came across good too!

Unvaccinated nurses show up to work, Kentucky, USA

Transcript:

Nurse: "Are we terminated? Is that what you said?"

"No."

Nurse: "You said we're terminated. did you say that we were terminated?"

"Your access has been denied..."

Nurse: "Are we terminated?

"Yes you are."

Nurse: "Okay, so you're firing us?"

"You are off payroll effective..."

Nurse: "You firing us?"

"I will not answer your specific questions. I have told you what I'm doing..."

Nurse: "But i have not quit. So am I being fired?"

"You are being terminated."

The footage then shows other nurses experiences...

izbo10
The fact that they wouldn't give them termination letters is telling.

Roger Doodle
"You guys did have a choose." Holding a gun up to someone's head and telling them to get vaccinated or I'll shoot you is NOT a choice. That is a Mafia Boss. This is getting disgusting!

G G
How's everyone feeling about all the unity this pathetic administration is bringing to the table?. Orange Man bad though. Allegedly 80 million legitimate votes? Not a chance

Daniel Luevanos
"This doesn't have to get ugly" old bat talkin like shes seen a situation get ugly for real lmao wait till someone takes the blame out on her for messing with other people's money and livelihood I've seen people do some craazy shit when they get desperate

michael roberts
When they came for the nurses, you weren't a nurse...and when they come for you, there will be nobody to help/stand for YOU.

Scott Hellmann
Last year's heroes are now treated as this year's criminals. This is absolutely disgusting... We all need to stand up to this monstrosity just like this nurse.

utoobizfrlft
This goes for the military as well a lieutenant colonel resigned cuz didn't want to get vaccinated gave up his pension gave up everything for what he really believes in. Freedom

Love Love
Glad to hear an officer saying they are "protecting the PEOPLE, not the Government "..
thank you for your bravery and stay safe!!

Angel James
Praise to the law officers and military who took an oath "to protect the people" and now are standing tall on that oath.
The only way We the People put an end to this dictatorship administration, is to walk off.
Nurses, truckers, first responders, electric plant and linemen EVERYBODY join your fellow Americans and walk off.

scp-049 pestilence
This man gives me hope and the many around him who support this view.

We really must unite and work together as the Spartans say ( you are only as strong as your weakest link )

Thanks again to lawyer Liz Lambert for giving this to us to share with you all.

Use and amend as you see fit.

TEMPLATE LETTER TO YOUR GP:

Dear GP,

As you know I have the right to be fully informed of any medical procedure upon me.

So before we go any further and before you answer my questions on the procedure, you need to know the following facts:

On the morning of the 30th of January 1649, Charles Stuart - aka Charles the first of England, Ireland and the Dominions, was executed for the crime of treason against the UK Parliament.

In the afternoon, an Act of Parliament (Laws and Ordinances of the Interregnum) made it treason to proclaim any person King of England, Ireland or the Dominions.

That law has never been repealed through the passage of time and history.

That is also now the case in New Zealand.

Queen Elizabeth of England is therefore traitor to the UK Parliament and Governor General Dame Patsy Reddy is a traitor to the New Zealand Parliament.

Legally Dame Patsy was a traitor when she signed the Covid 19 Act into law.

This being a lawless act, the Act itself becomes ultra vires (outside the law).

As to your role in this as a doctor, you were covered against criminal and civil liability by section 34 of the Act.

That is a fact no longer because of the illegality of the Act itself.

Consequently, you are fully liable for any misadventure occurring as a result of this procedure.

Here are the questions I require you answer for me. Once they are answered I will then consider if I wish to go ahead:

1. Please advise me if the drug has been rigorously and independently tested against a control group of healthy individuals or animals and the outcomes of the tests?
   
   
2. Please advise me of a full disclosure of all the contents / ingredients of the drug that I am required to receive and if there are any ingredients toxic to the body?
   
   
3. Please advise of all adverse side effects / reactions associated with the drug since its introduction?
   
   
4. Please confirm that the drug that you are advocating / mandating that I take is not experimental mRNA gene altering therapy?

Once you have researched and answered these questions, I will consider whether I will go ahead with the procedure.

I am sure that as an educated and ethical professional, you will understand my insistence in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Your name...

EXCLUSIVE BOMBSHELL! Stew Peters talks with former Pfizer employee and biotech analyst, Karen Kingston. Kingston reveals what the FDA approval really means, and why it's "game over" for the vaccine manufacturer, and for the inoculation.

There is a global RISING UP occurring, and citizens are resisting, demonstrating unified non-compliance, in Australia, the UK and here in the United States. National File Senior Reporter Patrick Howley joins Stew to discuss.

It's a RACE TO THE FINISH! Globalist tyrants are ramping up in the push for inoculations, reducing the age to 5, masking, mandates, lockdowns and more Orwellian tactics because they know they're CAUGHT! DeAnna Lorraine is a best-selling author, and she joins Stew Peters today.

Financial Expert, fiduciary, Carlos Cortez joins Stew to predict a big-time market "rug-pull", insisting that the market is another false flag meant for deception.

• Do we have evidence Pfizer has not come clean over what is in the vials? Yes. The VAERS database shows an incredible diversity of AEs. How do we explain heart inflammation in young children, which might shorten their lives, or congestive heart failure immediately? Or how pregnant woman can kill their babies through breastfeeding, who have thrombocytopenia or thrombosis? Others have zero side effects whereas some have dead arm within 12 hours and can attach magnets to their bodies? None of this makes sense. The normal rate of miscarriage is 20%, but now it's 80% in some women. How do we explain acute respiratory distress or CNS disorders such as Guillain-Barré syndrome? Normally, when a product comes out, there may be a serious AE that appears, such as heart inflammation, which means the product is recalled just because of that single symptom. The DIVERSITY of these AEs is not consistent with a consistent product.
  
  
• Pfizer does not have a website up: A website is ALWAYS ready to go long before a new product is launched after approval. So you'd expect one such as 'comirnaty.com' complete with marketing slogans and package insert information. That there isn't one is a red flag. It suggests that Pfizer knows they're going to be held accountable for intentionally harming people with the product AS THE MANUFACTURER. What they don't want is charges being brought against them AS THE MARKETER. Providing they don't put marketing materials out there, they'll avoid a whole slew of multi-billion dollar lawsuits. Right now, they are not a marketer, so who is? Public health agencies (FDA, CDC, NIH) and the MSM. These have been the marketers to date. They have been the propagandists misleading the public.
  
  
• Has Pfizer violated criminal laws? Yes. As a manufacturer, they have not reported all the serious AEs and deaths through particular reporting channels available to them to the FDA. This is intentionally misinforming the FDA and the American people, so criminal charges will be filed. They do have 2 weeks to come clean as to the ingredients. A lot of information has been withheld until now, which can be construed as intentionally misleading people.

Dr. Stephen E. Jones: The FDA approved the mRNA genetic experiment on August 23, 2021 and gave them 14 days to provide a complete list of ingredients being used in the jab. This forces them to admit whether or not their experiment includes graphene oxide, as well as Adverse Event Symptoms (AES).

FDA approval also takes these companies out of the "emergency" category and makes them liable and subject to lawsuits. Now that millions of people have already received the jab, those adversely affected will have grounds to sue Big Pharma for using them as guinea pigs.

We have been told that FDA approval means government can now force us to take their jab. The opposite is the case. It is being removed from an "emergency measure" back into the "normal" process, where constitutional rights have to be respected.

Face coverings do not need to be worn:

• by children under 12
• by students on school buses
• on ferry services carrying passengers between the North and South islands
• on pre-booked public transport services within an Alert Level 1 area — bus or train services that collect your contact details before they depart, and allocate you a seat
• on a boat or ship that has no enclosed space for passengers, for example jet boat tours
• on charter or group tours
• on private flights
• by drivers, pilots, staff or crew of the service if they are in a space completely separated from passengers, for example pilots in a cockpit or train drivers in a train cab.

You also do not need to wear face coverings if:

• it is unsafe, for example if wearing one means a driver cannot safely operate the vehicle
• there is an emergency
• you have a physical or mental health illness or condition or disability that makes wearing a face covering unsuitable
• you need to prove your identity
• you need to communicate with someone who is Deaf or hard of hearing
• you need to take medicine
• you need to eat or drink, if eating or drinking is usually allowed
• it is not required by law.

Drivers and transport operators will not stop people without face coverings from boarding public transport. This is because some people will have legitimate reasons for not wearing a face covering. 

Where possible, drivers will be encouraging passengers to wear a face covering.

Exemption card for face coverings

We know that some people who have a disability or health condition may not be able to wear a face covering safely or comfortably. If you cannot wear one, you can get an exemption card. You can show your exemption card when needed, for example to a bus driver.

You do not need to have an exemption card, but you may feel more comfortable showing something official to confirm you cannot wear a face covering.

Get an exemption card

You can download a card from the Disabled Persons Assembly NZ, or contact them on 04 801 9100 or at info@dpa.org.nz

Download exemption card for face coverings (or as above...)

Face mask / covering exemptions

-Easy Read information about what to do if you cannot wear a face mask: Easy Read PDF

-Watch NZSL video on exemption cards

It is now mandatory to wear face masks/coverings on public transport, on flights, and if you are a customer or an employee involving customer contact such as at a supermarket, pharmacy or petrol station.

If you have a disability or health condition and you can't wear a face covering safely or comfortably, you are exempt from wearing one.

Some people may feel more comfortable showing something official that says they don't have to wear a face covering, so the Ministry of Health have designed an exemption card that people can print out or save onto their phones.

If anyone asks why you are not wearing a face covering, you can show them the card. You don't need to show this card to public transport operators like bus drivers, but you can if you want to.

This card has been developed by the Ministry of Health specifically for those who cannot wear face coverings safely or comfortably due to a disability or health condition. The use of this card is self-regulated and decided upon by the individual. However, the Ministry of Health encourage people to do the right thing and only use this Exemption Card if you need to.

If you have a disability or health condition and you can't wear a face covering safely or comfortably and would like an exemption card sent to you, please email info@dpa.org.nz.

The exemption card is available as PDF and jpeg versions which can be printed in credit card size, A5 or A4, or simply downloaded onto your phone. There is also a physical wallet-sized version of the card. If you would like the physical version sent to you, please let us know your postal address.

Transcript from video:

"Once again, time to probably update you a little bit because, right around the world people are having problems, thinking that their rights are being stripped from them; and there's a lot of fear, there's a lot of hurt, anguish and anger going on, because people don't know their rights.

So let's see if we can help you so that you don't end up here (courtroom) or here (hospital). If you know these simple things, then you're not going to have - not have to worry so much. Okay because everything is about contract. Now if I was to go through and explain everything in contract, it would take over two years and even then there would still be parts that haven't been covered; so just know that there are several basic things that can help you in your day-to-day life without having to worry so much.

Now if everything is about contract, what is a contract? But they come in all shapes and sizes:

• some are verbal
• some written
• some are formal
• some informal

But they all have three features in common:

1. you make someone an offer; or, someone makes you an offer;
2. they accept it; or, you accept it;
3. you promise to give something, usually money in return for what you're getting. The legal term for this promise is consideration, or deposit, whatever you want to call it.

But those are the three generally accepted facts that make a contract. Now it's between a willing seller and a an informed buyer if you're talking about real estate; but what we'll be talking about, mainly, is side of the road contracts and things that you don't realize are happening in your day-to-day life.

Corporations and their enforcement agents use contract law as a means of entrapment; and we don't even realize that what is happening, so, if you understand the laws of contract, we can avoid the consequences of these unwanted contracts - which we'll go into shortly.

This is the most important part. Whenever a corporation agent, or an enforcement agent, tries to engage us, just realize it is only an offer to contract. It's when I say 'You were speeding' - that's an offer to contract and it's how
we react to that offer, that either forms a contract or doesn't form a contract. So we're going to show you the little tricks, that constitute getting a contract into place - or not.

Once a contract is agreed to then a trust is formed; and this is the tricky part that most people don't realize, is that, once a trust is formed, the trustees are under obligation - not to disclose anything that is in that trust. That's the idea of a trust.

Now the rules of contract are so simple you'll kick yourself:

1. NEVER ARGUE (this is dishonourable) Okay, so the moment if you get pulled up and: 'You were speeding' - 'No I wasn't' - bang, argument! Automatically you are in contract for being dishonourable. It's that simple! Whenever anyone calls you on the phone and offers you a contract, never argue;
2. NEVER AGREE. If you agree, then there's a contract formed;
3. NEVER GO SILENT. Silence is a sign of yes or acquiescence. So you are agreeing to it by your silence. So never go silent. Always ask questions.

So if you ask a question of the officer, or the enforcement agency that's trying to get you into contract, ask them a question; and when they respond, ask another question. Because they have three times to form a contract; so if you ask three questions, then, they cannot go further with that contract; but they can change the subject. So if you got pulled up for say speeding and you asked three questions, the most common one is 'Have I been detained?' Because if you've been detained, the officer must read you your rights. So, the first right that they will say is 'You have the right to remain silent' So oh great 'I'll go silent!'

But anyway after you've asked three questions, then they could switch to see if your registration, or your insurance, or something like that. They could change the subject and have another three shots; but they only have three times; and you'll find that if you're very polite and very cooperative with them by asking questions, they will normally give up and let you go on your way.

Now these points you must remember that:

1. God
2. God created Man - Man lives under God's law
3. Man created Corporations - Corporations created Statute and must abide by their statute

..and that's the order. So man, sorry corporations, try to believe that they're God and they think they can override men. But that's not the case, because man lives under God's law, and corporations created statute, and they must abide by them. So just remember that statute created by private company, is the company rules. So they must abide by them and if you ask them the question - and this is all we're going to be learning in this presentation - is asking questions. So if you ask them 'Are you bound by statutes? Do you have to uphold statutes?' - they must answer 'Yes' - and we'll show you shortly how you can really hold them to account.

Right here in fact. If you go to the police website, the police website's up there and whatever country you're in; if you go to your enforcement agency's websites, you will find something like this 'Policing by Consent to have the trust and confidence of all'. So if you ask that question, or if you take a copy of this off their website and have it laminated and keep keep it with you at all times, you say 'On your website it says that you police by consent. Is that correct?' If they try to dispute it say 'Well look here, I have a copy just, just in case you didn't realize'. Now they must abide by statute; they are held accountable by the statute; and the courts will enforce that. So probably a good idea if you go on to all your different enforcement agency websites and you will see that they all police by consent - [New Zealand Police PDF here.]

Now if you don't know your rights - then you've definitely got none.

So if you know that everything is by consent and you know contract law, you have nothing to fear about anything. Which at the moment they're enforcing this fear right round the world and you don't have to be in fear. But this is what they will use, they will use force and fear to get your consent.

Now another one of your rights is that, anything - if they say 'We will arrest you, or we will cut your power off, we will do this, we will do that...', all you have to ask, and once again I'm teaching you to ask questions; 'If that is a threat, you're using force and threat to get me to consent. What does that do to the contract?'

Now if you ask that question, they must answer: 'That any threat or force - nullifies the contract.' So they cannot get your consent by force or fear.

So learning your rights is going to help you. If anyone offers us anything, we also have the right to full disclosure. Therefore, do not argue. So once again, ask them, ask them: 'Do I have the right to full disclosure?'

Okay so hopefully, these few little tips on contract law, will help you in your day-to-day life and you will get out of that fear regime that they keep trying to hold us in.

All the best on your journey."

This is a three-minute video from a lawyer - explaining your right to refuse.

The legal issues may feel overwhelming. Julia Haller, Attorney at Law breaks it down for the rest of us.

For More resources and information, visit https://defendingtherepublic.org/covid/

TODAY OUR GOVERNMENT RECEIVED THIS OPEN LETTER FROM LAWYER SUE GREY...

URGENT REQUEST FOLLOWING RESEARCH SHOWING THE "S PROTEIN" IN THE PFIZER JAB IS A TOXIN
June 4, 2021
From: Sue Grey suegreylawyer@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021, 23:33

Subject: OPEN LETTER No 2- An URGENT REQUEST FOLLOWING RESEARCH SHOWING THE "S PROTEIN" IN THE PFIZER JAB IS A TOXIN

To: Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz, Hon David Parker david.parker@parliament.govt.nz, Hon Andrew Little andrew.little@parliament.govt.nz, Hon Chris Hipkins chris.hipkins@parliament.govt.nz, ashley_bloomfield@moh.govt.nz, Chris James Chris.James@health.govt.nz, ayesha.verrall@parliament.govt.nz

Dear Prime Minister, Attorney-General, Minister of Health, Minister of Covid, Minister or Seniors, Director General of Health and Chris Hipkins.

I attach below some new and very important research which I must assume your advisors have not yet provided to you, or the experimental Pfizer injection rollout would surely already have been suspended.

It is now clearly established that the SProtein is a toxin that causes the harmful symptoms known as "Covid."

I surely don't need to explain the legal, ethical and human rights consequences of a government knowingly promoting a program which intentionally injects a life threatening toxin into healthy people.

I also attach a report indicating that injected nanoparticles (and the SProtein) do not remain in the arm muscle but instead circulate throughout the whole body.

The combined effect is that the Pfizer jab injects mRNA to take over cells to manufacture the deadly SProtein toxin and this spread throughout much of the body, manufacturing the SProtein toxin for days and in some cases many weeks.

This explains why even the limited available research from the two months of study as summarised in the Comirnaty Data Sheet identifies possible harm to many different parts of the body including the heart, blood, brain, musculoskeletal system, nervous system, fainting and dizziness etc.

This is no longer just a shocking experiment. Everyone involved is now on notice of this "injection roulette" which may result in death or serious injury to previously healthy people. The health and safety implications for employers and those who push this jab, are significant.

No post injection death can legitimately be ruled out as being caused or contributed by the injection, at least not without a full coroner's report. Certainly any post vax stroke, heart attack, other blood disorder, nervous system disorder or even suicide or car accident (known overseas as "vaccidents") must prima facie be assumed to be caused or contributed to by the jab, at least until a full coroners report is undertaken.

Similarly it is not good enough to claim that our seniors who die post jab were frail and likely to die. Surely if they were that frail they should have been spared from the jab. Anyway, surely "deaths post Jab" should be treated consistently with "deaths post Covid."

Despite the secretive, flawed and very passive official post jab injury reporting process (CARM), and as a result of the more active community led follow up, you are already on notice of a number of deaths and life threatening and life changing harm from this injection. The deaths and harm will inevitably continue if there are any further injections. Perhaps initially you had an excuse that you thought the SProtein was "safe." However now you are on notice that it is not "safe" by any definition.

Further, although you in privileged position are on notice, many members of the public who you were elected to represent remain deceived by misleading claims in crown propaganda that the jab is "safe and effective." In these circumstances there can be no "Informed consent." Each jab without Informed consent is in breach of the Health and Disability Code and is an assault.

In these circumstances, the ongoing program is surely criminal, and indeed may result in Homicide as defined by the Crimes Act:

158Homicide defined

Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever.

Compare: 1908 No 32 s 173

Anyone who aids, abets or otherwise incites homicide is a party to that homicide.

I note that the Director-General of Health has shared his view in sworn evidence that Covid is the most serious health issue for New Zealand in 100 years.

I invite you all to consider that claim very carefully and critically. Please put Covid in perspective against the many other challenges which we face, including for example heart attacks, strokes, cancer, suicide accidents and diabetes and the nitrate and other contamination of much of our water.

Surely you must agree that the harm is not from "Covid" but from the "Response to Covid."

The best expert evidence is that the risk from Covid is similar to the risk from influenza. Many experts are now saying that Covid is simply a rebranding of influenza and colds, supported by PCR testing that was never intended as a diagnostic tool. The WHO says that PCR testing should not be used beyond 20-25 cycles. OIA responses indicate that in NZ PCR tests use up to 45 cycles, which simply multiplies any contamination.

Our government is about to enter dangerous new phase if it proceeds to inject more healthy New Zealanders with an injection that experts have established is toxic.

Apart from the direct harm to those who choose, or are bullied to accept this injection, there is considerable peripheral harm. This includes the contamination of our Blood Bank with SProtein. We can only speculate on the risks for vulnerable people who receive blood contaminated with this toxin.

Please stop and reflect. Please listen to international experts who are independent from Big Pharma and who are not invested in the Covid paradigm.

Please listen to the New Zealand scientific and medical experts who have put their careers and reputations on the line out of extreme concern.

Please correct the misinformation that this injection is "safe and effective" and "approved by Medsafe" when in fact it did not meet the statutory criteria that "benefit exceeds risk."

There is no imminent health risk from suspending the program. Dr Bloomfield's sworn evidence was that the risks were mainly financial and reputational.

Please find the courage to challenge whoever is driving this, and any who act on dogma rather than evidence, reason or ethics.

The future of New Zealand depends on your courage to step up and make this critical call for our people.

I urge you to listen, engage and act in the public interest.
Please put aside your pride and the dogma, and suspend this program.
I am happy to assist however I can.

Sue Grey LLB (Hons), BSc (Biochemistry and Microbiology), RSHDipPHI
Co-leader NZ Outdoors Party suegreylawyer@gmail.com
sue.grey@outdoorsparty.co.nz

$1.2 M reward offered for proof COVID-19 (SARS-COV-2) virus exists:

Many investigations and reports have been generated around the world concerning the disastrous SARS-COVID-2 / COVID-19 or CCP (Chinese Communist Party) Virus; however, for some people and institutions, it has not been satisfactorily proven that it is the one that generates the deaths attributed to it.

After several initiatives that offered rewards to whoever managed to isolate the virus from someone supposedly contaminated with it, the group led by evangelist pastor and journalist Samuel Eckert, breaks the record by offering the equivalent of $1.2 million on its website.

"1million € for scientific proof of the existence of a coronavirus, including documented control attempts of all steps taken in the proof," the page announces.

It should be noted that it is not the existence of the virus in doubt, but instead that it is the cause of death of those infected with it.

The website adds: "The currently offered 1 million EUR will be completely covered by Team Samuel Eckert. Thank you very much for your commitment! Get in touch."

He had already collected about $13,500, which will be returned to the contributors.

Eckert is one of many people who still doubt the veracity of the whole narrative surrounding the CCP virus and the strong push to vaccinate everyone on the planet.

He has also created channels on Telegram and other social networks, offering a forum for exchange for those who are like-minded. One of his Telegram accounts links 120,000 users.

Italian journalist Cesare Sacchetti, meanwhile, adds a bit more information about the requirements to be met by those aspiring to Eckert's reward.

"German journalist Samuel Eckert is offering a reward of 1 million dollars for those who provide irrefutable proof of the existence of Covid-19," he writes in one of his tweets.

He adds: "By proof, he means the isolation of the virus according to Koch's postulates. To date, no one has been able to win Eckert's challenge," reiterating that the virus does not meet the classical requirements established since 1905.

Robert Koch was a German physician who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1905 for his work on tuberculosis and established the postulates on the lethality of a virus, not its existence.

Many questions are surrounding the pandemic and the repeated contradictions of the WHO, and the difficulties in studying the origin of the virus in the virology laboratory of Wuhan, China, do not contribute anything to clear them up.

More and more questions arise, such as the one raised a few days ago by the lawsuit filed by the clinical scientist and immunologist-virologist of a Southern California laboratory, Dr. Derek Knauss, and his colleagues from 7 universities - against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for massive fraud.

After testing 1,500 samples from people who tested "positive" for the CCP Virus [COVID-19], these scientists found that ALL of the samples had evidence of Influenza A and Influenza B, something that had already been discovered in other cases, and none of COVID-19.

"When my lab team and I subjected the 1500 supposedly positive Covid-19 samples to Koch's postulates and put them under an SEM (electron microscope), we found NO Covid in all 1500 samples. We found that all 1500 samples were primarily Influenza A and some Influenza B, but no cases of Covid," said Knauss.

Let’s keep in mind that this offer was made in April 2021 and no one claimed the reward. Why? Because there is simply no isolated “virus” and no demonstrable COVID-19.

Welcome …

Voices for Freedom launched in December 2020. We are a non political grassroots organisation which has generated a strong network of supporters and volunteers across NZ.

We provide a platform for relevant and important questions to be raised. We speak up for those who feel silenced and we stand strong against the heavy censorship of any view that opposes the narrow government and media narrative.

We are focused on protecting New Zealander's fundamental human rights with a particular focus on freedom of speech, health and medical freedom and all freedoms under attack from an over zealous and oppressive Covid-19 response.

Voices For Freedom is concerned about the heightened levels of anxiety reported in the community following the increase in misinformation and disinformation being spread by mainstream media over the past year.

Collectively, this increase generates fear and the potential for irrational responses. When operating from a perspective of irrational fear, the possibility for ill-informed, rushed health-related decision-making increases, especially when people are under the illusion that they have no choice.

Sue Grey LLB (Hons), BSc (Biochemistry & Microbiology), RSHDipPHI explaining her Open Letter to the Prime Minister and others about the Pfizer Vaccine and breaches of the Medicines Act and misleading and deceptive claims.

Dr Tm Cowan explains the well known scientific methods for virus isolation and asks for paper proving the isolation of SARS-COV-2 (Covid-19), AIDs and other so called viruses.

by Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Sally Fallon Morell
February 19, 2021

Isolation: The action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone; separation from other things or persons; solitariness.

– From the Oxford English Dictionary

The controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ever been isolated or purified continues. However, using the above definition, common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science, any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus' existence can be found. The logical, common sense, and scientific consequences of this fact are:

• the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can't be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;
• the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can't be known;
• "variants" of something that hasn't been shown to exist can't be known;
• it's impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.

In as concise terms as possible, here's the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages1 and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.

These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues.2 (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they're seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.)3

1. Isolation, characterization and analysis of bacteriophages from the haloalkaline lake Elmenteita, KenyaJuliah Khayeli Akhwale et al, PLOS One, Published: April 25, 2019. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734 — accessed 2/15/21
2. "Extracellular Vesicles Derived From Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and Regeneration," Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full — accessed 2/15/21
3. "The Role of Extraellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses," Flavia Giannessi, et al, Viruses, 2020 May

If we have come this far then we have fully isolated, characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous virus particle. However, we still have to show it is causally related to a disease. This is carried out by exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the manner in which the disease is thought to be transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings, one has now shown that the virus actually causes a disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission of an infectious agent.

None of these steps has even been attempted with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic virus. Our research indicates that a single study showing these steps does not exist in the medical literature.

Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a "virus." The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called "virus isolation." This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.

The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus' existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.

From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn't done:

1. There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.
2. Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can't be found outside the cell in this manner.

If No. 1 is correct, and we can't find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn't it possible to find it?

Finally, questioning these virology techniques and conclusions is not some distraction or divisive issue. Shining the light on this truth is essential to stop this terrible fraud that humanity is confronting. For, as we now know, if the virus has never been isolated, sequenced or shown to cause illness, if the virus is imaginary, then why are we wearing masks, social distancing and putting the whole world into prison?

Finally, if pathogenic viruses don't exist, then what is going into those injectable devices erroneously called "vaccines," and what is their purpose? This scientific question is the most urgent and relevant one of our time.

We are correct. The SARS-CoV2 virus does not exist.

Sally Fallon Morell, MA

Dr. Thomas Cowan, MD

Dr. Andrew Kaufman, MD

Everything is contract: Short interview with Prof Dolores Cahill. Don't sign the passenger papers!

A local resident has interrupted a press briefing by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison to complain that onlookers were trampling on his recently reseeded lawn.

Mr Morrison had been announcing a scheme to offer subsidies to residents on home renovations.

cheesball96
Nobody is above the lawn.

Daniel Ally
He just wanted Lawn and Order.

Bella OBrien
Owner watching tv: the idiot that is letting those guys stand on his new grass….WAIT THAT'S MY HOUSE!

Benitto Stefin
Man: "Can everyone get off the grass please?"
Media: Get off my LAWN !!!!!

Hammy Khan
alternate caption: "how every leader-civilian interaction should be"

WHY?

Look here: https://www.bitchute.com/video/mZZ0mQH9uIkI/

#polizei #fragen #antworten

This camera guy is clearly parked on a yellow line in hope to extort cash from motorists. he is parked in a restricted stopping area and the spot he picked is causing other motorists to enter oncoming traffic causing a hazard. if i was parked on that yellow line would i be fined YES I WOULD.

Rob G
As a general legal principle the police are not permitted to break the law in order to enforce the law.
There are some exceptions for specific instances.
(The police can speed and park almost anywhere to react to a crime being committed such as theft, violence and robbery etc)
But this is not one of them.
......
As an example ... a traffic warden who is a civilian employee cannot park his vehicle on yellow lines in order to park up while giving you a ticket for doing exactly the same thing.
That is why they drive around in twos, 1 jumps out to give you the ticket while the other drives around the block looking for the next victim,
(Oops... I should have said offender)
So the police can break simple traffic laws when reacting to a crime but they cannot do this when a crime has not yet been witnessed or reported.
A policeman driving above the speed limit without his blue lights on is committing an offence and can be prosecuted.
A policeman driving under blue lights and speeding when NOT engaged in an emergency response is also committing an offence and can be prosecuted.
......
In this situation this guy is not breaking the law while 'REACTING' to a crime that has been committed but he is actually sitting there breaking the law while 'WAITING' for one to be committed.
The main point here though is that he Is NOT the police but a civilian employee who is NOT exempt but he is working for the very people who are empowered with the authority to prosecute his behaviour.
.........
It is almost impossible to hold these people to account as you would need someone from the authorities prepared to prosecute their own staff.
And they are the ones who have briefed him on how to conduct himself anyway.
........
Same old story, who do you get to govern the governors.

Dariusz Wioslo
Well done ... more people should react like you

Kuldip Panesar
Well done more people should highlight stuff like this

Joe Downs
God bless you man for confronting this a hole

The Human
Respect to the man for standing up for the Peoples rights

rantnpod
This is what is needed people and yes he is a hazard...

Tony Eichensehr
Realize how he was asleep in the van, had no idea he's there until "excuse me sir" then jumped and shit himself XD

5273 ex rfn
Just proves the police think they are above the law and can flaunt the rules to suit them whenever conveniently possible..

4TheRecord
For anyone wondering why there's yellow lines there, it's to make it safe for those leaving the driveway's there so they can see if there's other vehicles coming or not. I would hate to have to pull out from that driveway without being able to see if there's anything coming from either side.

dave Scopes
Well done mate. They think they are above the Law. And in some cases they get away with it. And also we'll done. For recording with your phone around the correct way. It's about time someone did. Lol

steve cook
great stuff- you are a hero

A
In a police vehicle, dressed like a copper, where is his warrant card? Impersonating a police officer is a criminal offence isn't it?

FairDui.org founder and author Warren Redlich says if you're prepared, you don't have to roll down your window at a DUI checkpoint.

Mike B
I like how the DUI defense attorney is basically saying to be careful about not letting police break the law. Business must be slow for him now.

Libertatus in Perpetuum
I was brought up on the importance of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and my family was very proud as we are OLD SCHOOL Americans, I have ancestors who fought in the revolution of 1776.
When I became a police officer I told my Sgt. and my Lt. that I would not work these DUI checkpoints as I believed that my oath was sacrosanct and could not be broken. I told them both that DUI checkpoints are a violation of a citizens 4th Amendment right and I would not work them ever. They said no problem and I was never forced to. I took and still take my oath to preserve and protect the US and my state Constitution.

4catsnow
Supreme Court sanctioned "minor" 4th Amendment violation, geared toward keeping the public safe from the impaired operator...However, Constitutional guarantees are still in play...Someone armed with that knowledge and a video recording device can uncomfortably hold them to a higher standard of conduct than they are willing to rise to. That seems to be the chief stumbling block in a lot of these contacts. And after viewing a few of these examples on youtube..it begs the question..what goes on when there ISN'T a camera in the mix....

Lori Snow
"agencies do make it known when they will be out on DUI enforcement they just don't always say WHEN" I guess they don't always take your money when they are done taking your money either.

Lotsotrouble2
these checkpoints shouldn't be legal to begin with.

David David
The law enforcement spokesperson says it's to get impaired drivers off the road but everyone sees different. They more often than not abuse their authority.

Neavo
"you better be squeeky clean if youre going to do this."

Well who do you think the cops are targeting? The easy prey, Law abiding citizens who are just going about their lives, get stopped by a thief in blue, have to pay the thief in blue because hey hes got a gun and it looks like him and all his buddies are in road rage.

I say do it, draw attention to yourself, draw the process out as long as possible, make that line of cars behind you stack up.

Let all those drivers get super impatient at the police. You think the drivers behind you are happy about this checkpoint?

The longer they wait the less afraid they get and the angrier and more frustrated they get.

Then they start to think things like "Well what an excellent use of taxpayer money".

So yea, go against the grain, they need to earn their keep anyway and right now they are wasting our time,
so waste theirs right back.

Im sure they have already taken care of all the human trafficking, drug trafficking and mobs in the area which leaves only the hard working American Citizen to fill that quota.

The story of how everyone has a strawman created for them at birth and how it is used to collect revenue for your government. A fun and informative animation made in the spirit of freedom. Please spread and upload with credits intact also link back to our channel if you do.
Available for download from our website - www.infomaticfilms.com.

TPUC.org - Has closed since the owner sadly passed away some years ago.

America the Beautiful, or so you used to be,
Land of the Pilgrims' pride, I'm glad they're not here to see,
Babies piled in dumpsters, abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty, your house is on the sand.

Your children wander aimlessly poisoned by cocaine,
Choosing to indulge their lusts, when God has said abstain.
From sea to shining sea this Nation has turned away,
From the teaching of God's Law, and a need to always pray.

So many worldly pastors telling lies about our Rock,
Saying God is going broke so they can fleece the flock.
We've kept God in our temples, how foolish we have grown,
When all the earth is but His footstool, and Heaven is His throne.

We've voted in governments that are rotting to the core,
Appointing Godless judges who throw reason out the door.
Too soft to put a killer in a well deserved tomb,
But brave enough to kill that child before he leaves the womb.

You think that God's not angry, that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will it be before His judgment comes?
And how can we face our God, from Whom we cannot hide?
What is left for us to do, but stem this evil tide!

For if we who are His children, will humbly turn and pray,
If we seek His holy face, and mend our evil way,
Then God will hear from Heaven and forgive us of our sins.
He'll heal our sickly land and those who live within.

But, America the beautiful, if you don't then you will see,
A sad but Holy God withdraw His hand from Thee.

© Copyright 2007 Roy S. Moore

Did you know that it is a war crime, established in 1947, to force anyone to have a vaccination, or to experiment with them without their informed consent, or to continue a vaccine when there is a good possibility of injury or death?

Here are the 10 criteria that were established, according to the British Medical Journal (1996)...

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448,
7 December 1996.

CIRP Introduction

The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide.

This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body.

This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided.

This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients.

The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extened into general codes of medical ethics.

The Nuremberg Code (1947)

Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
   
   The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.


2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

For more information see Nuremberg Doctor's Trial, BMJ 1996;313(7070):1445-75.

Cite as:

• The Nuremberg Code (1947) In: Mitscherlich A, Mielke F. Doctors of infamy: the story of the Nazi medical crimes. New York: Schuman, 1949: xxiii-xxv.

Parent Directory: http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/

CCC 2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."9 "We must obey God rather than men"10:

Remedy and Recourse

Every system of civilized law must have two characteristics: Remedy and Recourse. Remedy is a way to get out from under the law. The Recourse provides that if you have been damaged under the law, you can recover your loss. The Common Law, the Law of Merchants, and even the Uniform Commercial Code all have remedy and recourse, but for a long time we could not find it. If you go to a law library and ask to see the Uniform Commercial Code they will show you a tremendous shelf completely filled with the Uniform Commercial Code. When you pick up one volume and start to read it, it will seem to have been intentionally written to be confusing. It took us a long time to discover where the Remedy and Recourse are found in the U.C.C. They are found right in the first volume, at 1-207 and 1-103.

Remedy

"The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents
the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel." (UCC 1-207.7)

It is important to remember when we go into a court that we are in a commercial, international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say. "I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!", the judge will most likely say, "You mention the Constitution again, and I'll find you in contempt of court!" Then we don't understand how he can do that. Hasn't he sworn to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged under one jurisdiction and defend yourself under another jurisdiction. For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you filed your French income tax of a certain year, do you go to the French government and say "I demand my Constitutional Rights?" No. The proper answer is: "THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. I AM NOT A FRENCHMAN." You must make your reservation of rights under the jurisdiction in which you are charged, not under some other jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your Reservation of Rights under UCC 1-207.

UCC 1-207 goes on to say…

"When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date." (UCC 1-207.9)

You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:

"The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as "without prejudice". (UCC 1-207.4)

Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve Notes, write under your signature: "Without Prejudice (UCC 1-207.4)." This reserves your rights. You can show, at UCC 1-207.4, that you have sufficiently reserved your rights.

It is very important to understand just what this means. For example, one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the judge just what he meant by writing "without prejudice UCC 1-207" on his statement to the court? He had not tried to understand the concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket. He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant by signing in that way, he told the judge he was not prejudice against anyone… The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and he lost the case. You must know what it means!

Without Prejudice UCC 1.207

When you use "without prejudice UCC 1-207" in connection with your signature, you are saying, "I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement."

What is the compelled performance of an unrevealed commercial agreement? When you use Federal Reserve Notes instead of silver dollars, is it voluntary? No. There is no lawful money or alternative, so you have to use Federal Reserve Notes; you have to accept the benefit. The government has given you the benefit to discharge your debts with limited liability, and you don't have to pay your debts. How nice they are! But if you did not reserve your rights under 1-207.7, you are compelled to accept the benefit, and are therefore obliged to obey every statute, ordinance, and regulation of the government, at all levels of government; federal, state and local.

If you understand this, you will be able to explain it to the judge when he asks. And he will ask, so be prepared to explain it to the court. You will also need to understand UCC 1-103, the argument and recourse. If you want to understand this fully, go to a law library and photocopy these two sections from the UCC. It is important to get the Anderson, 3rd edition. Some of the law libraries will only have the West Publishing version, and it is very difficult to understand. In Anderson, it is broken down with decimals into ten parts and, most importantly, it is written in plain English.

Recourse

The Recourse appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6, which says:

"The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in force, except where displaced by the code. A statute should be construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law." (UCC 1-103.6)

This is the argument we use in court. The Code recognizes the Common Law. If it did not recognize the Common Law, the government would have had to admit that the United States is bankrupt, and is completely owned by its creditors. But, it is not expedient to admit this, so the Code was written so as not to abolish the Common Law entirely. Therefore, if you have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit reservation of your rights at 1-207, you may then insist that the statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law.

If the charge is a traffic ticket, you may demand that the court produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint. If, for example, you were charged with failure to buckle your seat belt, you may ask the court: "Who was injured as a result of your failure to 'buckle up'?" However, if the judge won't listen to you and just moves ahead with the case, then you will want to read to him the last sentence of 103.6, which states: (2) Actually, it is better to use a rubber stamp, because this demonstrates that you had previously reserved your rights. The simple fact that it takes several days or a week to order and get a stamp shows that you had reserved your rights before signing the document. Anderson Uniform Commercial Code Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Co. The Code cannot be read to preclude a Common Law section. Tell the judge, "Your Honor, I can sue you under the Common Law, for violating my rights under the Uniform Commercial Code. I have a remedy, under the UCC, to reserve my rights under the Common Law. I have exercised the remedy, and now you must construe this statute in harmony with the Common Law. To be in harmony with the Common Law, you must come forth with the damaged party."

If the judge insists on proceeding with the case, just act confused and ask this question: "Let me see if I understand, Your Honor, has this court made a legal determination that sections 1-207 and 1-103 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the system of law you are operating under, are not valid law before this court?"

Now the judge is in a jam! How can the court throw out one part of the Code and uphold another? If he answers,
"yes", then you say: "I put this court on notice that I am appealing your legal determination." Of course, the
higher court will uphold the Code on appeal. The judge knows this, so once again you have boxed him in.

Explain U.C.C. 1-207

If you are confronted with explaining what the "UCC 1-207" does here is your answer.

When you are going to sign a contract (drivers license, lease, buying an automobile, snowmobile, a building permit, marriage license, devoice decree, or any other document).

BEFORE you sign!!! you have the right to draw a fine line through anything that is not to your liking. It can be a number, a letter, a word or a group of words. At this time you can add anything you want in the contract. Any changes you have made sign your name close to it and date it. A contract is to have all of the contract in full disclosure at the time of signing. If not the UCC 1-207 will stop you from giving up your rights on the contract you are about to sign and void out any part of the contract that you have not had the opportunity to view.

Now how the UCC 1-207 works.

After you put UCC 1-207 where your signature is going to be. "your signature" is the last you thing you put on the document. When you pick up your pen from the signed contract it is consummated, you have given up your right to change the contract. Here is some more UCC information. You can go to a public law library for more information.

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
(UCC1-207/UCC1-308 UCC 1-103)

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
   
   
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.