New victories for the Patients’ Class!
Thanks to the Patients’ Class, one of the two draft bills for compulsory vaccination in the Colombian parliament was overthrown and moreover, the decree on the vaccination pass was declared null and void a few days ago!
The medical dictatorship, the DOCTATORSHIP has been
shattered.
In the past months, not only have thousands supported and signed the appeal
and the petition for a referendum reproduced below, but also thousands of
people have spontaneously taken legal action (constitutional complaints,
annulment actions, administrative actions, disciplinary actions, criminal
charges, etc.), in addition to countless other actions, that is: actions of
resistance and struggle. The driving force and impulse for all this:
the protest out of illness. These offensive
activities against the doctatorship, against the medical class and against its
helpers and accomplices in the state, this expanding and spreading
confrontation are the patho-practical context and the real reason for these
defeats inflicted on the medical class and its
doctatorship.
Everywhere, also in other countries, the patients’ class
is germinating and growing
by virtue and the
strength out of illness.
ˇComo se ve
claramente,
la enfermedad sigue haciendo frente!
ˇAbajo la clase
médica!
ˇAdelante la clase de pacientes!
As you can clearly
see:
Illness continues to make
front!
Down with the doctors' class!
Ahead with the patients' class!
SPK/PF Colombia, 15.05.2022
-----------------------------------------------
Popular petition for a referendum:
NO to the law on
compulsory vaccination against
"COVID-19"!
Dear Members of Parliament:
THE WILL OF THE PATIENT IS OF THE HIGHEST LEGAL PRIORITY
THERE MUST BE NO COMPULSORY VACCINATION
AND ALSO NO FORCED MEDICAL TREATMENT
We, the signatories of this petition, demand
that Bill No. 386 of 2021, "whereby
vaccination against Covid-19 is ordered as a compulsory public health measure", be declared null and void.
In addition, we demand that Bill
No. 290 of 2021 "whereby compulsory vaccination against Covid-19
is ordered" is also declared null
and void.
In addition, we demand that any other Bill ordering compulsory
vaccination against "Covid-19" be equally declared null and void.
RATIONALE
(1) The
above-mentioned draft bills provide for the compulsory vaccination of persons residing in Colombia against the
so-called "Covid 19 virus".
(2) These draft bills
are aimed at declaring the will of the patient, i.e. his or
her unwillingness to undergo any medical treatment whatsoever, to be legally irrelevant.
However, the patient's declaration of will to refuse medical
treatments has unconditional legal priority and must be given absolute
precedence over all else. This legally binding priority
of the patient's will is protected by the constitution and laws, as well as by
international treaties.
(3) It is prohibited by law to order compulsory
medical treatment. The patient's will takes priority as a matter of law.
If a patient refuses medical
treatment, whichever that may be – in this case it
is vaccination – the patient's
will must be observed under all circumstances. If the patient's will were not
observed, this would constitute a criminal offence.
Attempting to forcibly vaccinate the population is a blatant violation of
fundamental rights and is also a blatant
violation of Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights. This international rights agreement is binding on all states and it
is an integral part of the Colombian Constitution. Article 7 of the
aforementioned International Covenant explicitly prohibits medical treatment
without the patient's consent, because this would be a violation of the law, constituting "torture ... cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment". Moreover, forced vaccination,
like any forced medical treatment, blatantly contradicts the principles of
Articles 5 and 6 of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human
Rights, which affirm that any medical
treatment is subject to the patient's consent.
According to international treaties and human rights declarations, as well
as the Helsinki (1964), Tokyo (1975) and
Lisbon (1981) declarations of the World Medical Association, all doctors
worldwide are prohibited to act against the will of the patient. No doctor
is permitted to impose a medical measure using coercion. Doctors are not
permitted to follow any rules or laws that contradict these declarations of the
World Medical Association, which are binding for all doctors, because these
medical standards are legally binding for doctors and have the status of law. According to these declarations, doctors
are also explicitly obliged to oppose regulations and administrative acts if
they restrict the rights of patients. In particular, physicians must oppose
regulations that impose coercive medical measures on the patient, and
physicians must ensure that the refusal of medical measures is not interpreted
to the patient's disadvantage. This is required by the above-mentioned
declarations of the World Medical Association as well as the international
treaties, covenants and declarations of human rights mentioned above.
(4) The Colombian
Constitution and Colombian law are in line with the above-mentioned
international legislation and jurisprudence, as they also explicitly protect
the patient's self-determination and will, since these objects of legal
protection are among the fundamental rights, such as: physical integrity and
prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (art. 11 and 12 of the Colombian
Constitution), freedom of conscience (art. 18 of the Colombian Constitution),
right to self-determination (art. 16 of the Colombian Constitution) and others.
Colombian law has explicitly established that no one may be forced to undergo
medical treatment against their will (art. 10, paragraph d of Law 1751 of
2015), and likewise Colombian law strictly and explicitly prohibits doctors to
carry out medical interventions without the patient's consent (art. 15 of Law
81 of 1981 – Code of Medical Ethics).
This has been repeatedly confirmed by jurisdiction of the Colombian supreme
courts. For example, in its 2017 ruling T-365, the Colombian Constitutional Court confirmed and ruled that, in
general, any compulsory medical treatment, i.e. any medical intervention
against the patient's will, and in particular any compulsory vaccination, is
unconstitutional and constitutes a serious violation of fundamental rights.
In this ruling – which would not exist without the persistent struggle of the
patients' class, including people affected by the vaccination – the Court
explicitly points out and instructs the Colombian Ministry of Health that a
doctor must prove in each individual case that he or she has obtained the
patient's consent for any medical treatment, including any vaccination. The
Court emphasises that "any physical intervention without [the
patient's] consent constitutes one of the most serious forms of violation of
the law", and it refers to one of its judgments of 1999. This
legal principle, achieved through the persistent and persevering struggle of
patients, has been confirmed time and again by the Constitutional Court, e.g.
in judgments T-559 of 1995, SU-337 of 1999, T-1019 of 2006 and many others.
One must repeat: a medical
intervention carried out with coercion, i.e. a medical measure without the
patient's express consent, constitutes, as the Constitutional Court
emphasises, "one of the most
serious forms of violation of rights and must therefore necessarily be under
prohibition".
If a doctor treats a patient without the patient's express consent, this
constitutes a fundamental relationship of subordination. Therefore, this
exercise of medical violence must be made a punishable offence from the outset
and as a matter of priority.
Informed consent" [ = consent of the patient after being informed by
the doctor: consent is only legally effective if the patient was informed
before the medical treatment, i.e. that he or she was also fully informed about
possible adverse effects and damages caused by the medical treatment] and
respect for the patient's will are not mere formalities, but are rights of the
patient and a legal obligation of the doctor towards the patient.
(5) All these laws and the court
rulings to protect patients were enacted as a minimum measure of prevention, to
ensure that the serious atrocities that
doctors commit and have always committed against patients are never
repeated. It is not without reason that part of these patients' rights, which
are enshrined in international legislation, bears the name Nuremberg Code
(1947). In the Nuremberg Medical Trials of 1947, doctors were sentenced, some
to death, for their atrocities and killings committed against patients during
the Nazi era. As a result of these trials, the Nuremberg Code was
introduced.
It was precisely
this Nuremberg Code that gave rise to the modern so-called informed consent, which, as
already mentioned, is a legal guarantee for the patient and a mandatory
requirement that every doctor must fulfil in any medical intervention.
International and national legislation to protect patients stems from the fact
that there was overwhelming evidence that all over the world, and not only
during the Second World War and not only under the NAZI regime, but everywhere
and even more recently, it were and still are doctors who used their medical arsenal to carry out forced
treatments,
experiments
and torture as effectively as possible and to prevent the death
(often the last option of the tortured!) of the abused torture victims only to
torture them again in order to obtain more information.
Forced sterilisation,
experiments with biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, the use of human
guinea pigs for medical-military and/or medical-commercial experiments etc.
etc. etc., – the series of crimes committed by doctors and their trail of
blood, the blood of patients, could be continued endlessly.
Surprising? In 2012, the "German Medical Congress" published its
so-called "Nuremberg Declaration 2012". The occasion was the 65th
anniversary of the Nuremberg medical trials in 1947, when doctors were accused
of having organised and carried out the experiments and mass murder of patients
("Action
T 4", 275,000 patients murdered by starvation,
through killing by gas, by petrol injections).
In the "Nuremberg Declaration 2012" (adopted by the "German
Medical Assembly" only reluctantly, at a distance of 65 years, but then
finally adopted under public pressure) it is admitted that the worst atrocities and crimes against humanity (including the mass
murder of patients) during the NAZI regime were committed by their colleagues,
the doctors, members of the medical association.
With regard to
the medical
doctors' authorship of the mass murders of patients, it is important
not to forget that the doctors carried out these murders on their own
initiative, on a mass scale and almost with enthusiasm, which could not be
concealed in the declaration of the "German Medical Assembly", nor
could the fact that the perpetrators of these crimes ranged from ordinary
doctors to the medical leaders of the medical associations and the medical
universities.
Black sheep of a distant past? Not at all! In a vain attempt to redeem
itself, a renowned medical journal recently succinctly confessed that "medicine during the Nazi era is not a matter
of the distant past. The historical evidence is that the thinking, values and
activities of health professionals and biomedical researchers in this context
are but extreme manifestations of
problematic possibilities inherent in medicine
generally" (The Lancet, Issue
10277, 6 March 2021, page 862)
These are the confessions of the medical doctors themselves.
(6) It was the pressure of
international public opinion when faced with these medical cruelties that led
to the adoption of the above-mentioned Helsinki, Tokyo and Lisbon Declarations,
which prohibit all doctors worldwide to act against the will of
patients and to use coercive medical measures. It was the protest of those
affected, the relatives of those maimed and murdered, those abused and affected
but not defeated by the cruelty of doctors, which achieved that they got
justice and that these rights could be enforced for evryone, including the
right that the will of the patient has
the highest legal priority. This has set limits to the arbitrariness of
doctors and created at least a minimum of control.
It is therefore everyone's duty and
in everyone's own interest to prevent these
rights from being taken away from the population. Any yielding to the doctors'
quest for power would mean giving up hard-won ground. Not only would the most
basic civil rights and minimal legal protections against authoritarianism and medical tyranny be removed.
Rather, it would have deadly consequences for patients, because people would
pay for it with their lives.
It is not a matter of narrow private interests, but it is a matter of
supreme public and general interest that the fundamental rights that have been
fought for and that protect the lives of patients are preserved. It needs this
wall of protection against the doctors who otherwise think they can – with
impunity – do whatever they want. Therefore: The Patients' Class is the first
duty of a citizen!
(7) With regard to the vaccines
against the so-called "Covid19 virus", the following should be noted
in particular:
(7.1.) These vaccines were
approved according to an accelerated, i.e. time-shortened, procedure. They do not have a regular approval by
INVIMA (Colombian National Institute for the Supervision of Medicines and
Food), but only a temporary and conditional emergency approval. However, even
for this vaccination – which is only authorised by an emergency procedure – the
requirement that the patient must be informed and agree applies just as much
and to the same extent.
Furthermore, it is known that governments
have signed liability exemption clauses in favour of multinational
pharmaceutical companies. This is to
ensure that these pharmaceutical companies are not liable for the damages and
deaths caused by their vaccines.
(7.2.) The fact that these vaccines can cause serious harm
is recognised by the medical doctors themselves. Numerous harms have been
reported after vaccinations [see the websites of the US CDC (Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention) and the EMA (European Medicines Agency)]. The
following harms have been documented:
Headache, muscle pain, fever, nausea, kidney damage, life-threatening
allergies (anaphylaxis), inflammation of the heart muscle (myocarditis) and
pericarditis (inflammation of the membrane surrounding the heart), transverse
myelitis (neurological damage to the spinal cord), the so-called thrombosis
syndrome with thrombocytopenia (clotting damage and blood clots that can be
fatal), the so-called Guillain-Barré syndrome (paralysis that rises from the
lower limbs and can lead to complete paralysis and even death) – and who knows
what else there is by now? ! The medium and long-term effects are not known, as
it takes at least 5 years to conduct such studies.
From a legal and penal
point of view, such damages are to be considered as serious bodily injury and
manslaughter.
Coincidences? Do the MPs believe in "coincidences"? We don't.
In no case can the legislator give its blessing to a medical measure, let
alone order it, if its effects are completely uncertain and even serious
physical damage and the death of patients are to be expected.
It is not a matter of admonishing prudence and caution, for there is a legally enshrined protective duty on the part of the legislature and
the authorities. That this duty is complied with is the least that needs to be
done. In view of the uncertainty as to which damages can be expected and to
what extent, and the countless reports of adverse effects, it is advisable for
every patient to be cautious and to refrain from being vaccinated, because the
risk of blind trust in the doctor can lead to death or serious injury. No one
should be exposed to such a risk.
In any case, the
final decision in this regard does not lie with any authority and certainly not
with a doctor. It lies solely with the patient: It is about his or her life and
physical integrity – in legal terms: the patient's will is legally paramount
and must be given priority.
(7.3.) As already mentioned, it will take at least 5 years before any
predictions can be made about how the vaccines work, and it is currently
impossible to estimate their medium- and long-term effects. But there are
already countless case reports about adverse effects. Should the population
therefore be turned into guinea pigs and laboratory rats with these draft
bills, which are solely for the benefit of doctors and their pharmaceutical
businesses? Indeed. This cannot be tolerated. It is highly illegal and a
blatant violation of the fundamental rights of the population.
(7.4.) It is presented as if
vaccination were voluntary. However, this supposed voluntariness of vaccination
is immediately dropped when people choose not to be vaccinated. These people
are then punished with the loss of their rights and they are excluded from
access to recreational and cultural venues, threatened with labour sanctions up
to and including being fired, quarantined and other restrictions. People are
thus discriminated against and marginalised, and they are deliberately
subjected to pressure in order to be vaccinated. If pressure and indirect coercion is applied, it is a mockery to speak
of free and voluntary consent.
The mere fact of being forced to disclose one's vaccination status to third
parties in order to gain access to a public place is a blatant violation of the right to confidentiality regarding medical
history data ( these data are protected by the fundamental right to
privacy). This right is a safeguarding right for patients. It had to be
enshrined in law, among other reasons, to prevent patients from being
stigmatised, discriminated against and abused.
In addition, medical confidentiality must be strictly observed by doctors.
If this right of patients is violated, it is the doctors who must take action
against such regulations, which they are legally obliged to do (see paragraph 3
of this petition).
(7.5.) Let's take as an example
the way mass vaccinations are carried out, e.g. the recent
"voluntary" vaccination campaign against "Covid-19": It is
well known that people in so-called health centres have to line up to be
vaccinated one after the other. No allergy test is done before vaccination. But
only this could determine whether someone is allergic to one or more components
of the vaccine. No, nothing like that. The vaccination is done as if on an
assembly line and the so-called informed consent is thus reduced to an empty
formality and it is thus ineffective.
In addition, it is to be expected at any time that due to someone's
specific physical condition he or she will suffer a severe anaphylactic shock,
which can be fatal (respiratory arrest), or one of the other serious and/or
fatal vaccination effects that are documented in the medical literature itself.
Must the population accept this without complaint and have no choice but to
ultimately join the statistics of foreseeable "collateral damages"
that are the effects of vaccination? Doesn't everyone have the right to act
prudently and to consider possible – known! – damages in advance, i.e. to
protect themselves from damages, that means not to get vaccinated in the first
place, if there is a possibility that the vaccination could result in serious
bodily injury, even death as a foreseeable consequence! Those who refuse to be
vaccinated have the right on their side. Indeed,
it is not only a pure matter of course, but a guaranteed right that the
patient's will not to be harmed must be observed by every doctor.
The Vaccination Act cannot abrogate this fundamental and constitutional
right. No one can be forced to risk
being seriously injured or even killed on any pretext or because they are being
persuaded that what they are being given is good for them.
Anyone who is
earmarked as a sacrifice for the altar of a lethal medicine has every
right to resist by any means.
(7.6.) Yesterday it was still
said that vaccination was "voluntary". Today, pressure is already
being exerted and those who are unwilling to get vaccinated are threatened with
losing their rights and being discriminated against and excluded. Next, it will
be made compulsory to be vaccinated and this will be forcefully put into
practice.
Is this a medical
response because
there is so much protest and so many are radically refusing to grovel and
submit to the vaccination diktat?
Is it therefore a
measure to hold down and punish those patients who insist on their
self-determination and assert their will against the doctor? In fact, it is.
(7.7.) The harmful and deadly
outcomes of the vaccination campaign are predictable: Here, too, there will be
deaths and mutilations, so-called "collateral" damages of vaccination – for
which doctors are primarily responsible, by action or omission, regardless
of whether they are present at the vaccination site or not. This is because doctors have the legal
obligation as guarantors to prevent harm to patients: The doctor bears primary
responsibility for every medical intervention.
Does the legislatur shamelessly intend, in advance, to exempt doctors from
criminal, civil and disciplinary liability for possible serious and fatal bodily
injury and instead forcibly place the burden on the injured parties? Isn't it a
downright irresponsibility and doesn't it put patients in the greatest danger
when governments not only exempt vaccine manufacturers from contractual
liability but also want to forcibly shift the burden of vaccine damage onto the
injured parties?! Will legislators submit to all this and put the rule of
medicine and the profits of the medical industry above the law?
When it is claimed that the vaccine is "free", this is nothing
but whitewashing and fraud. This is intended to confuse the population and
conceal the fact that the vast sums that are now being thrown down the throats
of the medical corporations by the government were previously extracted from
the population by means of permanent wage confiscation (so-called taxes). The
population has already bled (financially) and now it has to bleed once more and
to die as guinea pigs in an imposed medical experiment.
However, forced vaccinations are forbidden by law and constitutional law
and this has to stay that way. The legal
priority of the patient's will is of the highest public and general interest,
i.e. in the interest of EACH AND EVERYONE. The private profit interests of
the medical profession and the medical-pharmaceutical industry must step back
in the face of this.
(8.) Whoever chooses not to be vaccinated is NOT a danger to others. But
that one is punished if one doesn't get vaccinated and is forcibly subjected to
compulsory medical treatment based on dangerous assumptions that harm the
social community is clearly illegal and unconstitutional in any case.
(8.1.) Fortunately, the majority
of the population has now developed to some extent the ability to digest and
metabolise the medical poison that is circulating. This is thanks to illness, which is the only real and effective immune
system to defend against the harmful effects of iatro-capitalism. This is
especially true when illness is patho-practised and the
protest inherent in
illness is purposefully directed outwards against this harmful and deadly
iatro-capitalist system.
(8.2.) Just from the very
limited medical perspective that assumes a so-called "immune system",
doctors have had to acknowledge in their literature that the immunity they call
"natural" offers much greater protection than that which they
attribute to their vaccines – although instead of "natural immunity"
it should more correctly read:
Those who activate
and transform their illness into action and are thus invigorated (get their
strength out of illness – sind gut bei Krankheitskraft)
are better able to cope with external irritants, even in the form of a virus.
This is an admission that their vaccines have failed, when they now have to
confess that their vaccines do NOT protect those who are vaccinated. To
distract from this, those who do not get vaccinated are marginalised and
isolated.
It is obvious: If the vaccines
really had the effect claimed by the vaccination ideologists, then all
vaccinated people would be completely safe and protected and no vaccinated
person would have to fear infection from anyone!
But because vaccination – in
spite of all medical propaganda – does
not offer any protection, there is a campaign against the unvaccinated. In
order to divert attention from the total bankruptcy of the vaccination
ideologists, the unvaccinated are medically blamed for the disease and built up
as a "danger". This is as factually unfounded as it is illegal (hate
speech: incitement to discrimination and exclusion).
The medical class as a whole uses the fight against illness as a mere
pretext. As a pretext, because it is not the causes of illness that are targeted
(see below), but the patients, by falsely accusing them of "endangering
public health". In this way, the population is divided and turned against
each other, while the doctors are off the hook. Divide et impera? That is
obvious.
(8.3.) It is a dangerous
assertion and only a pretext that in order to "protect public health"
it would be necessary to compulsorily vaccinate everyone and that those who
refuse would have to reckon with further coercive and punitive measures by the
state. This punishment is preceded by the branding and social ostracism of
those who refuse vaccination: it is asserted that they are a danger as a
potential "source of infection". Such punitive measures, which are
merely based on the completely made-up ASSUMPTION that this – merely assumed –
danger could perhaps materialise at some point in the future, are absolutely
forbidden in the legal system. A merely assumed, abstract risk is not a concrete danger that must be
averted. This was stated by the Constitutional Court, for example, in its
ruling C-040 of 2006: It is against the constitution to decree compulsory
medical measures "based" on nothing other than a merely hypothetical,
merely assumed danger projected into a distant future. Such assumptions, such
almost paranoid medical hypotheses,
are highly dangerous because they aim to punish people now for the sole reason of assuming that they might become a danger
to someone or something at some point in
the future.
Under the pretext
of illness, punishments are imposed – discrimination, exclusion from society,
etc. (see above). And this – forbidden ! discriminatory treatment is directed
against all who could become ill. So against EACH AND EVERYONE.
No punishment without law (nulla poena sine lege). This most basic legal maxim
is being undermined by the medical class. When the medical class is in charge,
someone is punished without there being a law, without there being a
"crime". The mere assertion by a doctor that there is a possibility
of someone becoming ill is enough to set punitive measures in motion. Isn't that a HEILs(HEAL)- dictatorial
declaration of war
against everyone?
Those who are not vaccinated are not a danger. On the contrary, the
division of the population and the incitement against the part of the population
that has not been vaccinated is a great danger for all, as every incitement and
the exclusion and discrimination of parts of the population in history has
shown: it only serves to maintain medical power, the power of the medical
class, and thus EACH AND EVERYONE are put in mortal danger.
No one becomes seriously ill and ends up in a so-called
intensive care unit simply because
they have come into contact with the medical poison that is circulating.
Medical poison: even the official medical literature does not dare to rule out
the possibility that it originated in a medical laboratory. In any case, it was
and is used as a poison against the population: The "virus" as a HEALTH- ideological pretext for repressive
medical-police measures.
In fact, someone ends up on an intensive care unit because their body has
been exploited, worn out, weakened and ruined on a daily basis for years,
because they are forced to live constantly in biological, chemical, radioactive
and other filth produced by the iatro-capitalist industry and, last but not
least, because they have to breathe in the deadly air pollution (more than 7
million are killed every year by air pollution, which is admitted in the
official medical literature without the slightest shame and has never led to
any practical consequences).
Many are also forced to eat a miserable diet of food and drink crammed with
no less harmful additives, all in the interests of the cannibalistic hunger for
surplus value and to the detriment of all.
This is
medically
approved and declared harmless by health and occupational
health certificates from doctors who conceal all these damages, and patients
are constantly thrown into the jaws of wage slavery, where they are exploited
to the last drop of blood.
If someone is made ill and therefore cannot continue to work, the doctors
treat them. That means: they repair the sick labour commodity. In addition to
the damage caused by exploitation, there is also the damage caused by therapy,
i.e. the damage caused by the doctor. One part of the body is medicated and the
sickness soon reappears in another part of the body. These therapies serve no
other purpose than to put the patients back into the condition of being further exploited and re-exposed to
the same disease-causing reality, where they accumulate more and more damage, under
the same blows that have already finished them off before.
Exploited and exhausted, worn down and then sedated with medication, one is
gradually robbed of the strength to cope with external irritants. Held down and
rendered defenceless, one is easy prey for everything that attacks from the
outside. The weakened body is unable to metabolise and cope with this medical
poison called coronavirus
(Latin virus = poison), which falls on
fertile ground in a medically botched body.
It would be better to have learned in good time to come to terms with
illness, to make use of its help, in order – instead of swallowing everything –
to
direct illness outwards as a protest,
together with others, against the
conditions that cause illness and those responsible for it.
All these accumulated damages (a consequence of exploitation and
oppression) are glossed over by the doctors as "concomitant
diseases". This in turn serves to conceal the social, i.e. the
iatro-capitalist origin of illness, with which the doctors try to evade their
responsibility (guarantor position!), some by doings, some by omissions.
Instead of taking action against these iatro-capitalist causes of illness, the
medical class constantly renews and reinforces this damaging connection.
To make matters worse, the already damaged patients are medi-cynically
blamed for "their" illness. They are hounded, discriminated against
and marginalised, with the false claim that they are a "danger to public
health". This medical
fabricated hostility towards patients, this incitement to eradication, has even
led to some people shamelessly claiming that the "unvaccinated" are
"potential murderers"! This is the direct consequence of the racism
unleashed by doctors against the sick, it is the direct and deadly consequence
of their iatro-racism.
(8.5.) . And who is not ill in
the midst of a harmful and deadly reality like iatro-capitalism? Everyone is
ill because we are all forced to live under these pathogenic, harmful and
deadly conditions. Anyone and everyone can become acutely ill at any time. That
must be reckoned with at all times. Because capitalism does not exist without illness. Diverting
attention from this and scapegoating others is discrimination that everyone
must oppose.
Discrimination in
general is highly illegal. Discrimination on the basis of illness is the basic
and typical form of discrimination, which, as already known and mentioned
above, led to the worst atrocities during National Socialism, but also at other
times and in other places.
In this context, it is not superfluous to remind the legislator of the
following: At the beginning of the 20th century, forced vaccination was used by the Supreme Court in the USA as a
precedent to legalise forced sterilisations! These forced sterilisations
were carried out in the USA until the 1970s(!), based on these sterilisation laws,
which were aimed precisely at patients branded by doctors as a "danger to
public health". In the words of this Supreme Court: "The principle of
compulsory vaccination has been given such a broad meaning that it also covers
the cutting of fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough"
(US Supreme Court 1927, Buck v Bell).
These American sterilisation laws were praised by the
Nazis and they incorporated them directly into their so-called laws on racial
HYGIENE.
But you don't have to go that far away. Here in Colombia, however, things
have ended differently: Recently, the legal priority of the patient's will and
the prohibition of compulsory medical treatment had to be ratified again by the
Law 1996 of 2019, to the point that the so-called incapacitation (guardianship)
was abolished. This 2019 Act was introduced in accordance with the UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with So-Called 'Disabilities'. This UN
Convention of 2006 was directed against medical crimes: Doctors had diagnosed
patients as "mentally disabled" and then forcibly sterilised them.
This medical practice of forced sterilisation also existed in Colombia, an
openly eugenic and totalitarian practice that had once even been approved by
Colombia's highest courts. But the 1996 Law of 2019 put a stop to these crimes,
which bore the mark of the medical class. This was achieved by the patients
affected, who didn't give up and fought tenaciously.
Does that still sound far-fetched? "Conspiracy theory"?
What is theoretical about a so-called "conspiracy theory" when
pathopractice has confirmed it point by point? Nothing.
Again: if
compulsory vaccination, i.e. vaccination against the expressly declared
unwillingness of the person concerned, is declared legally permitted, and if
there is such a law, the way back to the darkest times of history with its
medical crimes is opened. Such a law removes the obstacles that have so far
stood in the way of this development and one of these obstacles is the
fundamental rights fought for by the patients' class.
(9.) To sum up: There is the
fundamental right to life and the fundamental right to physical integrity. Any
forced vaccination is an interference with the fundamental right to bodily
integrity and punishable as grievous and dangerous bodily harm and as attempted
murder. No one can be forced and coerced to let vaccinations harm or kill them.
The issue here is a vaccination that
·
is useless and not needed (those who refuse to be
vaccinated do not constitute a danger)
·
is not tested (the vaccine is not regularly licensed.
Usually at least 5 years are needed to test the medium-term effects of a
vaccine
·
turns the vaccinated into guinea pigs: with the forced
mass vaccinations there are now carried out those test series that should have
been carried out long before the vaccinations
·
causes serious harm (see the increasing reports of
serious and even fatal effects after vaccination)
·
is rejected by countless people, i.e. en masse
·
is compulsorily enforced by means of a vaccination
campaign and which segregates those who refuse to be vaccinated and banishes
them from social life. The free and self-determined decision of these people is
illegally ignored and their physical integrity (protected by legal guarantees)
is illegally interfered with
·
Restricts forcibly the fundamental rights of the
population.
Conclusion:
The doctors in the respective health offices, hospitals, health centres and
in the associated vaccination brigades are the perpetrators of the damages
caused by vaccination, i.e. it is them who are primarily responsible for the
damages caused to the civilian population. The doctors' responsibility under
criminal and civil law follows from their legally regulated guarantor status.
This fact is as obvious as it is clearly regulated by law. To deny it would be
to make oneself an accomplice in medical crimes and would potentiate this
injustice. And this is exactly what the Congress wants to do!
So, what is this?
Is this another step towards the seizure of power by the medical class?
Another step
towards consolidating their domination over the people?
DOCTATORSHIP? Yes,
indeed.
Is this compatible with the statutory function of the Congress or is this
not rather the disempowerment of the Congress by the medical class? Are we
allowing the doctors to overthrow the legislatur? The legislatur is not obliged
to submit to the doctors' claim to power. On the contrary, he is obliged to
make the interests of the people alone the maxim of his action and he must
oppose all attempts at usurpation.
What is to be
done?
Everyone must know this:
Whosoever vaccinates against the will of the patient notwithstanding all
this,
who promotes compulsory vaccination,
who makes organisational preparations in order to implement the vaccination
by force,
is liable under civil and criminal law for the bodily injuries and deaths
caused by vaccination, liable for unlawful coercion, bodily injury and murder
on a mass scale.
Those who act in this way pose a public danger and wage war against their
own people. The perpetrators must be arrested and placed in solitary
confinement. There is a danger of suppression of evidence.
This is what the
population, i.e. what everyone can do, now immediately and as a minimum:
denounce the doctors and their accomplices to the public prosecutor's office so that
criminal proceedings are opened and the perpetrators are prosecuted for
coercion, grievous bodily harm and attempted murder.
Explicit demand to the members of Congress:
The least that
members of Congress need to do by law now:
Oppose the
"Covid-19" forced vaccination bill and bring it down.
THE WILL OF THE
PATIENT HAS THE HIGHEST LEGAL PRIORITY
THERE MUST BE NO
COMPULSORY VACCINATION,
AND NO OTHER
COMPULSORY MEDICAL TREATMENT
THE PATIENTS' CLASS IS THE FIRST CITIZEN'S DUTY
Signature
SPK/PF MFE Colombia
----------------------------------------
Many thousands have signed this petition and this popular initiative. Here
on the internet, the lists with the signatures are not attached.
THE WILL OF THE
PATIENT HAS THE HIGHEST LEGAL PRIORITY
THERE MUST BE NO
COMPULSORY VACCINATION
AND NO OTHER
COMPULSORY MEDICAL TREATMENT
THE PATIENTS' CLASS IS THE FIRST CITIZEN'S DUTY
SPK/PF MFE Colombia, 19.04.2022
Translation into English: SPK/PF MFE Greece
SPK/PF(H), 27.05.2022
 |
||
 |
 |