WAR CRIMES CORONA 👑 QUALIFICATION OF THE NUREMBERG TRIBUNAL 1947.
SenIor cLErK Of thE TRiBUnal
10 COUNTS OF VIOLATIONS OF THE NUREMBERG CODE IN THE FALSE COVID-19 PANDEMIC (2020-2021)
10 points of the Nuremberg Code that have been violated and continue to be violated by the organizers and executors of the project "pandemic", "covid", "reset", "zeroing", "inclusive capitalism", or whatever they call it. All that has been happening in the world in recent years and even decades, because the preparation, as we see, began long before the onset of the "Covid-19 pandemic" in 2019-2020. Spreading this information will help fight Covid-fascism - communism!
Nuremberg Code No. 1 : Voluntary consent is required
The first paragraph of the Code: "The voluntary consent of a person is absolutely necessary."
1. NO - IN FACT, EVERYWHERE THERE IS SEVERE PRESSURE AND COERCION TO WEAR A MASK, QUARANTINE, SELF-ISOLATION, TESTING, VACCINATION, AND EACH OF THESE MEASURES ENTAILS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES FOR HUMAN HEALTH.
Nuremberg Code No. 2: Give fruitful results that cannot be obtained by other means
The second point of the Code: "The experiment should be such as to bring fruitful results for the benefit of society, unattainable by other methods or means of research, and not accidental and unnecessary in nature."
2. NO - MORTALITY FROM THE DISEASE UNDER THE PRETEXT OF PROTECTION FROM WHICH DANGEROUS MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS ARE IMPOSED ON PEOPLE IS SMALL, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MEANS OF TREATING IT, WHICH ARE NEGLECTED FOR THE SAKE OF FORCING VACCINATION AS AN UNCONTESTED PROCEDURE.
Nuremberg Code No. 3: Basic Experiments on animal Experiments and Natural History
The third point of the Code: "The experiment must be planned and based on the results of animal experiments and knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, so that the expected results justify the experiment."
3. NO - STANDARD ANIMAL TRIALS HAVE NOT BEEN CONDUCTED PROPERLY UNDER THE PRETEXT OF THE NEED FOR URGENT VACCINE PRODUCTION AND IN FACT THE SECOND AND THIRD PHASES OF THE PILOT STUDY ARE CONDUCTED ON HUMANS, INCLUDING THE ELDERLY, THE SICK, PREGNANT WOMEN AND CHILDREN.
Nuremberg Code 4: Avoid Unnecessary Suffering and Trauma
The fourth paragraph of the Code: "The experiment should be conducted in such a way as to avoid unnecessary physical and mental suffering and trauma."
4. NO - THERE IS A CRUEL PSYCHOLOGICAL PRESSURE, PANIC MONGERING BY ALL THE MEDIA, CREATING AN ATMOSPHERE OF INTOLERANCE TOWARDS THOSE WHO DOUBT THE ADVISABILITY OF HARSH MEASURES, QUARANTINE AND MASK RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND BREATHING, PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, ETC.
Nuremberg Code No. 5: It is forbidden to conduct an experiment if there is reason to believe that injury or death will occur
The fifth paragraph of the Code: "An experiment should not be carried out if there is a priori reason to believe that death or disability will occur; except, perhaps, those experiments in which experimental doctors also act as subjects."
5. NO - THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF COMPLICATIONS OF EXISTING AND THE EMERGENCE OF NEW DISEASES IN CONNECTION WITH THE WEARING OF MASKS AND QUARANTINE, AS WELL AS POST-VACCINATION COMPLICATIONS THAT ENTAILED, INCLUDING DISABILITY AND DEATH OF THOSE SUBJECTED TO EXPERIMENTAL VACCINATION.
Nuremberg Code No. 6: Risk should never exceed benefit
The sixth point of the Code: "The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that which is determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by experiment."
6. NO - THE DEGREE OF RISK AND CONSEQUENCES THAT HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF MEASURES AGAINST THE PANDEMIC SERIOUSLY EXCEED THE DANGER TO WHICH MOST PEOPLE WERE EXPOSED WHEN THE DISEASE ITSELF SPREADS, SINCE THE MORTALITY OF THE VACCINATED IS MANY TIMES HIGHER THAN THE MORTALITY RATE IN THE USUAL POPULATION.
Nuremberg Code No. 7: It is necessary to prepare even for the remote probability of injury, disability or death
The seventh paragraph of the Code: "Proper preparations must be made and appropriate conditions provided to protect the subject from the even remote possibility of injury, disability or death."
7. NO - THERE IS NO PROTECTION, VACCINE MANUFACTURERS REFUSE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR PRODUCT, SHIFTING IT TO THE STATE, I.E., IN FACT, TO THE TEST SUBJECTS THEMSELVES, MEDICAL SUPPORT FOR VICTIMS IN CASE OF POST-VACCINATION COMPLICATIONS FOR THE MOST PART IS ALSO ABSENT.
Nuremberg Code No. 8: Experiments should be conducted by qualified scientists
The eighth paragraph of the Code: "The experiment should be carried out only by persons with scientific qualifications. At all stages of the experiment, the highest degree of skill and caution should be required from those who conduct or participate in it."
8. NO - VOLUNTEERS AND DOCTORS WHO DO NOT HAVE THE APPROPRIATE SPECIALIZATION AND QUALIFICATIONS PARTICIPATE IN VACCINATION, IT IS CARRIED OUT IN PLACES THAT DO NOT HAVE THE STATUS OF MEDICAL CENTERS, IN SHOPPING CENTERS, IN THEATERS, GYMS, ON THE ROAD IN MOBILE VANS, ETC. UNSUITABLE PLACES.
Nuremberg Code No. 9: everyone should have the freedom to stop the experiment at any time
The ninth paragraph of the Code: "In the course of an experiment, a person should have the right not to complete the experiment if he has reached a physical or mental state in which the continuation of the experiment seems impossible to him."
9. NO - A PERSON IS NOT FREE TO INTERRUPT THE EXPERIMENT, SINCE HE CONTINUES TO BE SEVERELY PRESSURED WITH THE HELP OF THE ENTIRE REPRESSIVE APPARATUS OF THE STATE, AS WELL AS ADMINISTRATIVE MEANS, FORMAL AND INFORMAL, INCLUDING WITH THE HELP OF TOTAL PROPAGANDA.
Nuremberg Code No. 10: A scientist must stop the experiment at any time if there is a probable cause that led to injury or death.
Tenth paragraph of the Code: "In the course of an experiment, the responsible scientist must be prepared to stop the experiment at any stage if he has probable reasons to believe that the exercise of conscientiousness, excellent skills and careful judgment requires him to continue the experiment. the experiment can lead to injury, disability, or death to the subject."
10. NO - SCIENTISTS AND DOCTORS, AS WELL AS THE OFFICIALS BEHIND THEM, ARE NOT GOING TO STOP THE EXPERIMENT, DESPITE THE MANY WARNING SIGNALS ABOUT ITS DANGER AND THE NEED TO TRY ABOUT THE MISTAKES ALREADY MADE, WHICH LED TO TRAGIC CASES AND OUTCOMES FOR THE SUBJECTS.
It should be noted that flagrant violations of all recognized international norms and rules were noticed by many citizens and public organizations, which led to the preparation of lawsuits to the relevant structures.
This is what the first and last pages of this lawsuit, prepared and filed in The Hague, look like.
original claim
After reviewing all the materials presented below, try to answer one natural question, at least only one and so far for yourself ...
Should all defendants related to the event be tried for violations of the Nuremberg Code?
2020m to the present with a sonorous stylish name from 1968 "Coronavirus" named no less sonorously COVID 19 in 2015 by inventor Richard Rothschild and registered 19 patents for tracking through mobile 📲 phone in the Netherlands and already in 2020 also acquired the sonorous name "Pandemic"
yes, of course, from planners and customers, to executors of criminal orders, all levels!
Let's go 🛫
10 types of violations of the Nuremberg Code in the "Covid-19 pandemic"
The Nuremberg Code was adopted by the Nuremberg Tribunal after the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi doctors in August 1947. At this trial, the blatant facts of monstrous medical experiments on millions of people were revealed. It was the first international document describing the principles of conducting medical experiments on humans, introducing ethical standards for scientists and physicians engaged in such experiments.
How to Create the Section Symbol (§) in Documents
Background
Documents that must be noticed by the Bankruptcy Noticing Center (BNC) must adhere to the guidelines set by the BNC or the notice will fail to be generated. The guidelines are defined in the document titled "Creating PDF Documents for CM/ECF" that is posted on our web site under the Electronic Case Filing menu. The document includes a list of fonts that are acceptable to the BNC. These rules also govern special symbols used within documents.
Creating the "Section" Symbol (§) in WordPerfect Documents
To create the "section" symbol (§) in WordPerfect documents that adhere to the BNC guidelines, follow these steps:
Create your document with one of the acceptable fonts as defined in the document referenced above titled "Creating PDF Documents for CM/ECF".
Place your cursor where you want the "section" symbol (§) to display.
Click on the menu option Insert.
On the drop-down menu, click on the menu option Symbol.
In the Set section of the Symbol screen choose the Typographic Symbols and a list of symbols will display.
Click on the "section" symbol (§), then click on Insert and Close.
Creating the "Section" Symbol (§) in Word Documents
To create the "section" symbol (§) in Word documents that adhere to the BNC guidelines, follow these steps:
Create your document with one of the acceptable fonts as defined in the document referenced above titled "Creating PDF Documents for CM/ECF".
Place your cursor where you want the "section" symbol (§) to display.
Click on the menu option Insert.
On the drop-down menu, click on the menu option Symbol.
On the Symbol screen that displays, click on the Special Characters tab.
Click on the "section" symbol (§) in the list of symbols that displays, then click on Insert and Close.
Creating the "Section" Symbol (§) from Either WordPerfect or Word Documents
An alternate way to create the "section" symbol (§), regardless of what word processing software you are using, is listed here:
Create your document with one of the acceptable fonts as defined in the document referenced above titled "Creating PDF Documents for CM/ECF".
Place your cursor where you want the "section" symbol (§) to display.
Click on the Microsoft Windows Start button.
On the drop-down menu, click on the menu option Programs, then Accessories, then System Tools, then Character Map.
In the Character Map screen that displays, hit the down arrow in the Font section and choose one of the acceptable fonts as defined in the document referenced above titled "Creating PDF Documents for CM/ECF".
Once the font is chosen, find the "section" symbol (§), double click it, then hit the Copy button.
Go to the document you are creating and paste the "section" symbol (§) into the document.
https://telegra.ph/How-to-Create-the-Section-Symbol--in-Documents-09-12
(SS),the SteyrDaimlerPuchcartel and the Heinkel and Messerschmittairplane producers,to name only a few. I.3Mauthausen was administered by the SS in Berlin, under the direct commandof SS Colonel Franz Ziereis. Inmates represented every European nationalityand many social categories, including political prisoners, Jews, peo
The basic principle of NDT is that in order to conduct an experiment on a person, his voluntary informed consent is necessary after providing him with full information: about the nature, duration and purpose of the experiment; about the methods and methods of its implementation; about all the alleged inconveniences and dangers associated with the experiment, and, finally, the possible consequences for the physical or mental health of the subject that may arise as a result of his participation in the experiment
HELSINKI DECLARATION
WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
Ethical Principles for Medical Research
involving humans as research subjects
Adopted at the 18th General Assembly of the World Medical Association (WMA), Helsinki, Finland, June 1964, as amended and supplemented by:
- 29th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, October 1975;
- 35th General Assembly of the WMA, Venice, Italy, October 1983;
- 41st General Assembly of the WMA, Hong Kong, September 1989;
- 48th WMA General Assembly, Somerset West, South Africa, October 1996;
- 52nd WMA General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000;
- 53rd WMA General Assembly, Washington, USA, 2002;
- 55th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, 2004;
- 59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, South Korea, October 2008
A. Introduction
1. WMA has developed the Declaration of Helsinki as the basis for ethical principles in medical research involving human subjects as a research subject, including research that uses biological materials obtained from a person or personal data that can be identified with a person.
The Declaration should be read as a whole, and each of its paragraphs should not be applied without considering all others related to it.
2. Although the declaration is directed primarily at physicians, the WMA encourages the use of these principles by other participants in medical research involving human subjects.
3. The physician's duty is to improve and protect the health of people, including patients, who participate in medical research. His knowledge and conscience should be directed towards serving this duty.
4. The Geneva Declaration of the WMA defines the duty of a physician in the following words: "the health of my patient will be my top priority." At the same time, the International Code of Medical Ethics states: "when providing medical care, the doctor should act only in the interests of the patient."
5. The basis of medical progress is research, which ultimately should include research involving human subjects. Patient populations that are under-represented in medical research should be given appropriate access to participate.
6. In medical research involving a human subject, the participant's health prevails over all other interests.
7. The main goal of medical research with human participation as a subject is to understand the causes, development and effects of diseases, as well as to improve preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions (methods, procedures and therapy). Even the best current interventions must be continually evaluated through research into their safety, efficacy, availability and quality.
8. Most of the interventions in medical practice and in medical research involve risks and inconveniences.
9. Medical research is based on ethical standards that promote respect for all people and the protection of their health and rights. Some populations of research participants are particularly vulnerable and require special protection. These populations include patients who cannot independently consent or refuse to participate in the study, as well as those who may consent under duress or under someone's adverse influence.
10. Researchers should take into account the ethical, legal and administrative requirements, as well as the standards for conducting research with people from their own country, and relevant international norms and standards. No national or international ethical, legal or administrative requirement can prejudice or nullify any remedy for research participants set out in this declaration.
B. Principles for all medical research
11. The duty of physicians participating in medical research is to protect the life, health, dignity, integrity, the right to self-determination, the right to privacy and confidentiality of the personal information of the research participant.
12. Medical research involving humans should be in accordance with generally accepted scientific principles and based on maximum knowledge of the scientific literature, other relevant sources of information, the results of appropriately conducted laboratory tests and, where applicable, animal studies. It is also necessary to show humanity towards the animals used in the research.
13. Particular attention must be paid when conducting research that may have a negative impact on the environment.
14. The design and procedure for each experimental procedure involving human subjects should be clearly stated in the research protocol. The research protocol must contain a statement of the ethical rationale and an indication that it complies with the principles of this declaration. The protocol should also include information on funding sources, sponsors, institutional affiliation, other potential conflicts of interest, incentives for research subjects, and provisions for treatment and / or compensation for research subjects who have been harmed as a result of participating in the trial. The protocol should describe the arrangements that will be made to provide research subjects, upon completion, with access to interventions identified in the research as beneficial, or access to other appropriate medical care or other benefits.
15. The research protocol must be submitted for review, comments, recommendations and approval to the research ethics committee prior to the study. Such a panel must be independent of the researcher, sponsor, or any other influence. The Commission should take into account the laws and regulations of the country or countries in which the study is to be conducted, as well as relevant international norms and standards, which, however, should not prejudice or override any protections for research participants set out in this declaration. The Commission has the right to monitor ongoing research. It is the responsibility of the investigator to provide the panel with the information to be monitored, especially information regarding serious adverse events. Changes cannot be made to the protocol without consideration and approval by the commission.
16. Medical research involving human subjects should only be conducted by qualified, scientifically trained personnel. Research in patients or healthy volunteers should be supervised by a competent physician or other suitably qualified healthcare professional. The health of the research participant is always the responsibility of the physician or other health care professional, not the research subjects, even though they have given their consent.
17. Conducting medical research involving a population or community of disadvantaged or particularly vulnerable patients is only justified if the research meets the health care needs and priorities of that population or community, and if there is a reasonable likelihood that the population or community will benefit from research results.
18. Any medical scientific research involving a human subject must be preceded by a careful assessment of the foreseeable risks and inconveniences for the subjects and communities involved in the research against the expected benefits both for them and for others and communities affected by the disease under study.
19. Any clinical trial must be registered in a publicly accessible database prior to recruitment of the first subject.
20. Physicians should refrain from participating in scientific research involving humans unless they are confident that possible risks have been adequately assessed and can be adequately controlled. Physicians should discontinue any research if the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits, or if there is compelling evidence of a positive and beneficial outcome.
21. Medical research involving a human subject should be conducted only when the importance of the goal outweighs the known risks and inconveniences for the subject.
22. The participation of capable subjects in medical research should be voluntary. While it may be appropriate to seek the advice of family members or community leaders, no capable person can be enrolled in scientific research unless he or she has given his or her free consent.
23. Every precaution should be taken to protect the confidentiality of research subjects and their personal information, and to minimize the impact of the research on their physical, mental and social well-being.
24. In a medical research involving a human subject, each potential participant should be appropriately informed about the goals, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, affiliation of the researcher to the institution, expected benefits, potential risks of the research and inconveniences that may arise from participation in the research, as well as any other relevant aspects of the research. A potential research subject should be informed about his right to refrain from participating in the research and the right to withdraw his consent to participate at any time without any negative consequences. Particular attention should be paid to the special information needs of individual potential subjects, as well as the methods used to convey information. After making sure that the potential subject understands this information, the physician or other qualified person should ask the potential subject for free informed consent, preferably in writing. If the participant's consent cannot be obtained in writing, his oral consent must be properly recorded and evidenced.
25. In order to conduct medical research using biological materials obtained from a person or personal data, the belonging of which to a person can be identified, doctors should, as a rule, ask for consent to the collection, analysis, storage and / or reuse of such materials. and data. There may be situations in which it is impossible or impractical to obtain consent for such research, or consent will threaten the credibility of the research. In such cases, the study can only be conducted after it has been reviewed and approved by the ethics committee.
26. In obtaining informed consent to participate in a study, the physician should be particularly careful when the potential subject is dependent on the researcher, or when there is a risk of coerced consent. In such a case, informed consent must be obtained by a suitably qualified person who is completely independent of the given relationship.
27. If a potential research subject is incapacitated, the physician must obtain informed consent from a legal representative. Such individuals may be included in research that is likely to be of no benefit to them only if it is aimed at improving the health of the population represented by the subject, cannot instead be conducted on capable individuals, and the risk and inconvenience to the subjects are minimized.
28. When a potential research subject, found to be incapacitated, is able to express his consent to participate in the research, the investigator must obtain his consent in addition to that obtained from the legal representative.
29. Research involving individuals who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, such as unconscious patients, may only be conducted if a physical or mental condition that precludes obtaining informed consent is characteristic of the study population. In such circumstances, the physician must obtain informed consent from the legal representative. If there is no such representative and the research cannot be postponed, the research may be continued without obtaining informed consent, provided that specific reasons for recruiting subjects in a condition that makes it impossible to obtain their informed consent are specified in the research protocol and the research has been authorized by the committee on questions ethics. Consent to continue to participate in the study should be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or legal representative.
30. Authors, editors and publishers have ethical obligations regarding the publication of research results. Authors must disclose the results of their human studies and are responsible for the integrity and accuracy of their reports. They should follow generally accepted ethical guidelines when providing information. Both positive and negative and controversial research results should be published or otherwise made available to the general public. The publication should identify funding sources, institutional affiliations and conflicts of interest. Research reports that do not comply with the principles set out in this declaration should not be accepted for publication.
C. Additional Principles in Conducting Medical Research Associated with Medical Care
31. A physician may combine medical research with the provision of health care only if the research is justified by its potential prophylactic, diagnostic or therapeutic value, and if the physician has good reason to believe that participation in the research will not harm the health of patients acting as subjects. research.
32. The benefits, risks, inconveniences and effectiveness of a new intervention should be tested against the best proven interventions currently in use, unless:
use of placebo or no treatment is acceptable in studies where no proven intervention exists; or
when there are compelling evidence-based methodological reasons for the need to use a placebo to determine the effectiveness or safety of an intervention, and patients who receive placebo or do not receive treatment will not be at risk of serious or irreversible damage to health. Extreme care must be taken not to overuse this option.
33. At the conclusion of the study, the patients who participated in it have the right to be informed about the results of the study, as well as the right to take advantage of any benefits derived from the study, such as access to interventions identified in the study as favorable, or access to other appropriate medical care. , or other benefits.
34. The doctor must provide the patient with complete information about which aspects of medical care are associated with the study. The patient's refusal to participate in the study or the patient's decision to withdraw from it should never be reflected in his future relationship with the doctor.
35. When treating a patient, if there are no proven interventions or they are ineffective, after the examination, the doctor, with the informed consent of the patient or legal representative, may apply an unproven intervention if, in the doctor's opinion, it gives hope for saving life, restoring health or pain relief. Whenever possible, such an intervention should be the subject of research designed to evaluate its safety and efficacy. In all cases, new information should be recorded and, where appropriate, made public.
Download the 1964 World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
The principles formulated in the Nuremberg Code have become the basis for many international and national legislation in the field of medical research on humans. Now they are violated and to anyone familiar with the document, as well as the realities of today, it is quite obvious. Therefore, the problem is that everyone carefully read his lines and compare them with the current situation, making independent conclusions.
To begin with, a brief introductory one. At the beginning of this century, laws were adopted to ensure the transformation of a person into a human-machine device through the introduction into his body of devices in the form of micro- and nano-devices associated with external electronic devices. At the same time, active development of technologies and devices capable of providing communication between man and machine, bio-, neurotechnologies and neural interfaces began.
Technologies have been patented that allow you to track the functioning of all organs and systems of the human body, including the brain, transmit information about it to external devices, as well as monitor the vital activity of the body from the outside. Then technologies were developed that also allow to influence the functioning of the human body, including higher nervous activity, in fact, to control it from the outside, against its will.
Biotechnologies, bio- and genetically engineered, were developed, allowing: to manipulate the human genotype, to carry out genomic editing, interfering with current processes at the most basic level, changing the most fundamental parameters of the human body and personality, ultimately. All the above-mentioned process went in parallel and led to the fact that by the present moment a person can be transformed into a new being, changing his biological nature.
And, finally, humanity was prepared for constant total vaccination with drugs that were not advisable for medical reasons and actually made him a hostage. Hostage: big business in the face of global pharmaceutical corporations, Bigpharma, inextricably linked with financial corporations, Finintern, and, more recently, technology corporations, Bigtech, which formed a supranational monster that rules the whole world.
All this, taken together, radically contradicts everything that was laid down by the entire history of the development of human civilization and was expressed in the provisions of the Nuremberg Code adopted as a result of the Nuremberg Trials after the Second World War.
Moreover, it contradicts, both in spirit and in its letter, as we can once again see:
Do mandatory masks and vaccines violate the 10 points of the Nuremberg Code?
Those who support the cult of COVID are conducting forced medical experiments on the world's population with mandatory masks and (planned) mandatory vaccines.
IMPLICATIONS: The Nuremberg Code was created 74 years ago as an ethical guideline to end exploitation through unwanted medical experiments. Do mandatory masks and vaccines ostensibly justified by COVID violate its 10 points?
The Nuremberg Code was created as an ethical guideline for protection against medical experiments. Do mandatory masks and vaccines violate it?
Mandatory masks
is still a standard working procedure for many counties, regions, counties, states and nations around the world as the iconic COVID agenda progresses. In many places, while COVID vaccines are not yet mandatory, authorities are rushing to prepare to do so by creating schemes such as immunity passports, vaccine certificates, and mandatory tracking databases that record who has given the shot and who has not. Meanwhile, inalienable sovereign human rights are limited to those who agree to take a shot. The madness and absurdity of the COVID cult becomes all the more apparent when you realize that its mandatory or quasi-imperative rules contradict a very important set of principles adopted in 1947.
It's simple and it's the Nuremberg Code, a set of 10 points that resulted from the infamous Nuremberg Trials held after World War II.
As a result of the work, the Nuremberg Code was developed, which enshrines the principle of informed consent - a principle that with the conduct of a special operation and fraud with COVID, as well as illegal decisions of many administrations of the world is extremely relevant today.
Here are 10 points in light of COVID restrictions and regulations.
10 paragraphs of the Code
Although the code is an international ethical guideline, it still does not appear to be enshrined in U.S. or German national law. We must assume that these governments, through their secret agencies such as the CIA, wanted to keep the door open for medical experiments (such as biological weapons programs such as war ticks) over their citizens without breaking the law:
"On August 19, 1947, the judges of the American military tribunal in the case of the United States against Carl Brandt et al. pronounced their verdict. Before declaring the guilt or innocence of each defendant, they were faced with the difficult question of medical experiments on people. Several German doctors in their defense argued that their experiments were not much different from previous American or German ones. In addition, they showed that neither international law nor the informal statement distinguished between legal and illegal experiments on human beings.
This argument bothered the doctor. Andrew Ivey and Leo Alexander, American doctors who worked with the prosecution during the trial. On April 17, 1947, Dr. Alexander presented a memorandum to the United States War Crimes Adviser highlighting six points defining the legality of the study. Permissible medical experiments" and revised the original six points by ten. Subsequently, the ten points became known as the "Nuremberg Code". Although the code addressed the defence as a whole, it is noteworthy that none of the specific findings against Brandt and his accomplices mentioned the code.
Thus, the legal validity of the document was not precisely established. The vague use of the code continued half a century after the trial, when it served as the basis for numerous international ethical statements, but found no place in either the U.S. or German national codes. However, it remains a landmark document in the field of medical ethics and one of the longest-running results of the Doctors of Litigation."
Nuremberg Code No. 1: Voluntary consent is necessary
The first paragraph of the Code:
"A person's voluntary consent is absolutely essential."
This point has been repeatedly violated only with the introduction of mandatory masks. For example, in the U.S., masks are defined in several places as "medical devices" according to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration). The first evidence is on the FDA website itself on this page, which discusses masks and which is embedded in the medical device category as follows:
The second piece of evidence is contained in the law: the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), which is a U.S. federal law passed by Congress. This and other federal laws establish the legal framework within which the FDA operates. The FD&C Act can be found in the U.S. Code of Laws (USC), which contains all general and permanent U.S. laws beginning with 21 USC 301. You can read it here. Look in Chapter II "Definitions" (page 3) and scroll down to section 201(h):
"(H) The term 'device' (except as used in paragraph (n) of this section and in sections 301(i), 403(f), 502(c), and 602(c)) means a tool, device, device, machine, device, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related item, including any component, part, or accessory that is (1) recognized in an official national form, or the U.S. Pharmacopoeia, or in any supplement thereto, (2) intended for use in the diagnosis of diseases or other conditions, or for the treatment, mitigation, treatment or prevention of diseases in humans or other animals, or (3) designed to affect the structure or any function of the body of humans or other animals, and which does not achieve its main intended objectives by chemical action inside or on the body of humans or other animals and which is independent of metabolism to achieve its main intended goals."
In accordance with this section, the mask meets the criteria necessary for designation as a medical device, as it meets paragraph (2), which is a device designed to prevent disease.
Has any politician asked people in the world if they want to wear masks and voluntarily wear medical devices? No. There was no free or informed consent.
Nuremberg Code No. 2: Give fruitful results that cannot be obtained by other means
The second paragraph of the Code:
"The experiment should be such as to bring fruitful results for the benefit of society, unattainable by other methods or means of research, and not accidental and unnecessary in nature."
We have to acknowledge the reality that COVID measures, such as mandatory masks or vaccines, are a giant medical experiment. Many people suffer from oxygen malnutrition due to prolonged wearing of a mask. Untested vaccines represent the largest global experiment in human history, they were sent to the market in less than 12 months, while the development of vaccines usually takes 7-20 years.
As mentioned in previous articles, these so-called vaccines (actually mRNA devices) were not designed to stop transmission, trigger a direct immune response (like traditional vaccines), or stop moderate to severe symptoms, so their risk-benefit ratio is very high.
Cloth masks made of bandans and rags are completely "random and unnecessary by nature".Meanwhile, there are many other ways to achieve "fruitful results" for society without these experiments: teach people the principles of natural health, naturally strengthen the immune system, and even take vitamin D supplements (studies have shown a link between those infected with COVID and vitamin D deficiency).
Nuremberg Code No. 3: Basic Experiments on animal Experiments and Natural History
The third paragraph of the Code:
"The experiment must be planned and based on the results of animal experiments and knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, so that the expected results justify the conduct of the experiment."
This paragraph has also been violated. Big Pharma did not conduct animal trials in a hurry to bring their "vaccines" to market.
Nuremberg Code #4: Avoid Unnecessary Suffering and Trauma
The fourth paragraph of the Code:
"The experiment should be conducted in such a way as to avoid unnecessary physical and mental suffering and trauma."
No masks and "vaccines" (which undoubtedly cause suffering, trauma and death) are needed for many reasons:
The number of COVID cases and the number of deaths are greatly inflated from the start;
- COVID is a repackaging scheme that reclassifies existing diseases to create the appearance of a new deadly disease and a pandemic when it doesn't exist. See the work of people like Dr. Genevieve Briand;
- The suspected new SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, purified, and 100% unconfirmed.
Nuremberg Code No. 5: It is forbidden to conduct an experiment if there is reason to believe that injury or death will occur
The fifth paragraph of the Code:
"An experiment should not be carried out if there is a priori reason to believe that death or disability will occur; except, perhaps, those experiments in which experimental doctors also act as subjects."
Is there an a priori reason to believe that not being vaccinated against COVID will result in disability or death? Given the past history of vaccine injuries, yes, there is. About 2 weeks ago, on January 29, 2021, the CDC reported more than 11,000 adverse reactions to the COVID vaccine, including 501 deaths and 10,748 other injuries, some of which did lead to disability. If you're not cowardly, check out these videos and compilations (here, here, here, and here) that show the terrible side effects of paraffin.
Nuremberg Code No. 6: Risk should never exceed benefit
Sixth paragraph of the Code:
"The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that which is determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by experiment."
From Big Pharma's point of view, the risk does not outweigh the benefits. They are protected from legal liability thanks to the NCVIA of 1986 and other preparatory laws such as the Public Emergency Preparedness and Preparedness Act of 2005, which paved the way for big Pharma's legal immunity. There is no risk, and the profit is astronomical.
On the other hand, for the average person, the situation is exactly the opposite; There is no benefit to taking a non-vaccine that does not protect you from serious symptoms and does not stop transmission, but which can lead to serious and debilitating effects such as paralysis and death.
Nuremberg Code No. 7: It is necessary to prepare even for the remote probability of injury, disability or death
The seventh paragraph of the Code:
"Appropriate preparations must be made and appropriate facilities provided to protect the subject from the even remote possibility of injury, disability or death."
There were no preparations! COVID vaccines are a giant worldwide experiment in humans, each participant of which is the equivalent of a human man or guinea pig. If you die, no luck! Big Pharma is sure to open its legal and public relations departments and immediately question the connection between their love and your death. They will never recognize the connection, and even if they do, there will be no legal consequences for them. There is no way out.
Nuremberg Code No. 8: Experiments should be conducted by qualified scientists
The eighth paragraph of the Code:
"The experiment should be conducted only by persons with scientific qualifications. At all stages of the experiment, the highest degree of skill and caution should be required from those who conduct or participate in it."
Doctors like Dr. Stefan Lanka and Dr. Tom Cowan, who challenge the prevailing narrative of virology, namely that contagious viruses exist and can infect you, will surely dispute that professional bureaucrats like Dr. Anthony Fauci and Big Pharma scientists are really qualified. but even if you agree with that, the scientists who make vaccines are not the ones who administer them.
This is done by ordinary nurses and doctors. How many of them really know what a non-vaccine is, what it does, a complete list of its ingredients, and a complete list of its long-term side effects? No one knows the latter precisely because it is a giant experiment.
By creating illegal mask mandates, politicians play doctor,putting themselves in the position of medical experts, dictating health directives and medical intervention to the entire population. People have not consented to politicians without medical training acting as their personal doctors.
Nuremberg Code No. 9: everyone should have the freedom to stop the experiment at any time
Ninth paragraph of the Code:
"In the course of an experiment, a person should have the right to complete the experiment if he has reached a physical or mental state in which it seems impossible for him to continue the experiment."
Do you have the right to put an end to the crazy cult medical experiments related to COVID? Of course not! People are discriminated against for not wearing masks, deprived of their right to travel, trade and work freely. People face fines and jail for not wearing masks.
People's rights are violated when they exercise their right to make their own medical decisions by refusing vaccines. The COVID subject being experimented on has no freedom.
Nuremberg Code No. 10: A scientist must stop the experiment at any time if there is a probable cause that led to injury or death.
Tenth paragraph of the Code:
"In the course of an experiment, the responsible scientist must be prepared to stop the experiment at any stage if he has probable reason to believe that the exercise of conscientiousness, excellent skill and careful judgment requires him to continue the experiment. the experiment can lead to injury, disability or death of the subject."
This paragraph includes the phrase "probable cause," which is probably well known to many people, especially Americans, as it is enshrined in the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects people from searches and seizures unless the police have a warrant based on probable because that person committed a crime. A probable cause is legally considered a higher standard than "reasonable persuasion" or "reasonable suspicion" that is used in other jurisdictions.
However, do you think any major pharmaceutical company has EVER voluntarily discontinued a vaccine because of their "superior skill and cautious judgment?" That they can harm people? No way! Profits are too great, and their line of defense is that some people may be injured or killed by vaccines, but all this for the "common good" of protecting society. As Martin Luther King said, "The oppressor never gives freedom voluntarily; the oppressed must demand it."
Inference
Society is now regressing. We give up the rights and freedoms we fought for out of fear. Collectively, we forget that we have long established basic human rights such as bodily autonomy, medical sovereignty, and informed voluntary consent.
The Nuremberg Code is a vivid reminder that we have already gone through all this before and gone through it to crystallize the lessons learned. We have to remember who we are and stop these crazy medical experiments with COVID – before it's too late.
https://thefreedomarticles.com/
https://telegra.ph/MESSAGE-OF-OVAL-CROWNED-BIOLOGICAL-TERRORISTS--COUNTRY-AND-WORLD-09-11
https://telegra.ph/DOMESTIC-STATE-TERRORISTS-US-09-11
https://telegra.ph/DELIBERATE-DESTRUCTION-OF-THE-WORLD-POPULATION--21-09-12
@infobrigadengeneral_bot