That’s pretty much what they’re saying AND they didn’t address coerced/informed consent at all. All they did is restate what the definition of consent was and in no way tied it to the mandates or vaccine.
All I'm getting from this article is the author thinks the Nazis would have done nothing wrong if they had just stuck boilerplate usage approvals on their experiential drugs before forcing people to take them against their will.
of course these vaccines are experimental... it's why the FDA's original approval spawned off roughly a dozen other clinicals investigating various matters. it's why not a single human can answer "what are the long term effects of these jabs 5 or 10 years out?" they couldn't even predict what happens 3 months out.
and don't get me started with the administrator declaring itself to not be performing experiments. it's like the nazis saying their own "treatments" were not experimental because they themselves declared them non-experimental.
It's even more (tragically) funny because the "truth sandwich" is just rebranding an old con artist's trick to get people to swallow a lie by surrounding it with factual statements.
Genocide is murder plus power. Since the people that are being systematically exterminated have power (thanks to the definition of "power" being changed to "people of a particular genetic makeup have this trait"), no genocides have ever taken place in history.
Because open a book written at the preamble to them occurring. Russia. Germany. Canada, France. The side that's gonna get got always is written in social justice terms and a redefinition of power. Unfairly beyond their station, privileged, unjustified societal position, favorable unmerited position, disproportionately represented, societal ills or inequalities: The words change, but the message does not.
It is standard dehumanization tactics, and the reason they're standard is because they work. The unskilled nobility of France need their heads straightened out and acknowledge they have privilege says Guillotine. The savages who claimed God's land without God's authority need to be enlightened says the Church. The farmers who work 12 hours a day to grow fat off the food they grow are laughing at your listless gov't-paid-for lifestyle says the communist. It's been far more than 100 years, and the message is always weirdly familiar.
However, in these settings, the public health goal of COVID-19 vaccination is seen as outweighing the rights of the individual to remain un-vaccinated.
Seen by whom? Who are our masters that get to decide when a public health goal gets to outweigh a person's right to bodily autonomy?
I'm not looking at things in fake optimistic way anymore, but realistic. And realistically looking, those in charge ignoring every little thing, law and court decisions while continue doing the same thing, just differently packed, maybe piece by piece separated and not getting punished. Feel free to tell me, what are the odds that people win against the evil now? I'm really curious, but don't answer with 'become ungovernable, go on solar system, grow your own food blah blah blah, etc etc' because that's like running away and 95% people won't do this, therefore the situation will slowly be just postponing forward. Tell me realistically (No hate, I'd love to be wrong here if this means we get to live more loose)
"The Nuremberg Code focuses on clinical research on humans. Therefore, it is no longer relevant once a vaccine moves beyond the clinical trial phase and has been authorised or approved for use globally".
It hasn't moved past clinical trial phase. They're still assessing it and won't be done until 2023.
It hasn't been authorised or approved. It's been given Emergency Use Authority, which still hasn't been looked at properly. They've just quietly moved it to "it's here now".
EU is perfect. You do not get any say on who they elect outside the EU parliament.
I hate how my leftist defend this institution like it is some beacon of democracy and how only racist right wingers are against it.
Unfortunately you are correct this time about "more feminine way". This is going to be the future, they will push it despite people not wanting it. Kind of like rape.
Governments escape their constitutional limitations via the supranational institutions. The EU and UN are designed to empower the governments against the citizens.
"We don't have to follow the Nuremberg code because we skipped the research phase and went right into production."
Genius!
That’s pretty much what they’re saying AND they didn’t address coerced/informed consent at all. All they did is restate what the definition of consent was and in no way tied it to the mandates or vaccine.
All I'm getting from this article is the author thinks the Nazis would have done nothing wrong if they had just stuck boilerplate usage approvals on their experiential drugs before forcing people to take them against their will.
of course these vaccines are experimental... it's why the FDA's original approval spawned off roughly a dozen other clinicals investigating various matters. it's why not a single human can answer "what are the long term effects of these jabs 5 or 10 years out?" they couldn't even predict what happens 3 months out.
and don't get me started with the administrator declaring itself to not be performing experiments. it's like the nazis saying their own "treatments" were not experimental because they themselves declared them non-experimental.
“They’re not experimental if governments use them for public health.”
That’s their opening argument. Yeah, it’s doesn’t get better.
Wow, that picture of a sandwich has totally made me rethink everything about Covid that I thought I knew!
It's even more (tragically) funny because the "truth sandwich" is just rebranding an old con artist's trick to get people to swallow a lie by surrounding it with factual statements.
We have accepted this kind of rationale in our society for over 100 years. Sexism is power plus prejudice therefore you can't be sexist against men.
Just redefine the problem and the problem goes away. Can't use experimental drugs on humans? No problems just don't call it experimental.
Genocide is murder plus power. Since the people that are being systematically exterminated have power (thanks to the definition of "power" being changed to "people of a particular genetic makeup have this trait"), no genocides have ever taken place in history.
Because open a book written at the preamble to them occurring. Russia. Germany. Canada, France. The side that's gonna get got always is written in social justice terms and a redefinition of power. Unfairly beyond their station, privileged, unjustified societal position, favorable unmerited position, disproportionately represented, societal ills or inequalities: The words change, but the message does not.
It is standard dehumanization tactics, and the reason they're standard is because they work. The unskilled nobility of France need their heads straightened out and acknowledge they have privilege says Guillotine. The savages who claimed God's land without God's authority need to be enlightened says the Church. The farmers who work 12 hours a day to grow fat off the food they grow are laughing at your listless gov't-paid-for lifestyle says the communist. It's been far more than 100 years, and the message is always weirdly familiar.
Seen by whom? Who are our masters that get to decide when a public health goal gets to outweigh a person's right to bodily autonomy?
Well, let's be real. Those in charge won't be held accountable nor participate in an way for breaking Nuremberg Code and be convicted or punished..
I'm not looking at things in fake optimistic way anymore, but realistic. And realistically looking, those in charge ignoring every little thing, law and court decisions while continue doing the same thing, just differently packed, maybe piece by piece separated and not getting punished. Feel free to tell me, what are the odds that people win against the evil now? I'm really curious, but don't answer with 'become ungovernable, go on solar system, grow your own food blah blah blah, etc etc' because that's like running away and 95% people won't do this, therefore the situation will slowly be just postponing forward. Tell me realistically (No hate, I'd love to be wrong here if this means we get to live more loose)
"The Nuremberg Code focuses on clinical research on humans. Therefore, it is no longer relevant once a vaccine moves beyond the clinical trial phase and has been authorised or approved for use globally".
It hasn't moved past clinical trial phase. They're still assessing it and won't be done until 2023.
It hasn't been authorised or approved. It's been given Emergency Use Authority, which still hasn't been looked at properly. They've just quietly moved it to "it's here now".
I've noticed that The Conversation, which I formerly read, has gone full woke.
EU is perfect. You do not get any say on who they elect outside the EU parliament. I hate how my leftist defend this institution like it is some beacon of democracy and how only racist right wingers are against it.
Unfortunately you are correct this time about "more feminine way". This is going to be the future, they will push it despite people not wanting it. Kind of like rape.
Governments escape their constitutional limitations via the supranational institutions. The EU and UN are designed to empower the governments against the citizens.
The O'Jays - For the love of Money