Tag: law

Was the Terrorist Attack in Colleyville a Replay of the Terrorist Attack in Garland in 2015?

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

I have intentionally not written about the terrorist attack in Colleyville, Texas, because my initial review saw significant parallels to the first ISIS attack on U.S. soil which took place in 2015 at Garland Texas, carried out by Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi.

In the Garland attack the FBI organized, facilitated and coordinated the attack. The FBI even drove the terrorists to the attack venue and then left once the shooting began. Yes, you read that correctly, the first ISIS attack on U.S. soil was organized by the FBI. {Go Deep} CTH dug deep on the 2015 Garland attack, so it wasn’t too difficult to spot the similarities between Garland 2015 and Colleyville 2022.

♦ Colleyville, Texas – Malik Faisal Akram, who was known as Faisal Akram, had a well known Islamic extremist history to British and American intelligence. Akram ranted, prior to his travel to the U.S, that he wished he had died in the 9/11 terror attacks. He was a regular visitor to Pakistan, and reportedly a member of the Tablighi Jamaat group set up to ‘purify’ Islam. To say the U.S. intelligence system knew Faisal Akram would be an understatement.  The FBI knowledge of Akram has now been confirmed by The Daily Mail.

link

This is a very important short read, especially powerful because the author (Sundance) is able to present so much telling information so briefly. Highly recommended, provides essential background (and present) for understanding American society, govt, and politics. ABN

Consider the following carefully

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

העתק: הש.ג

I don’t know if the time is ripe now for such an investigation to be taken seriously, but it’s quite clear to me that an investigation into serious violations of public policy, trust, ethics, fundamental rights and conspiracy – will be exhausted in the future
🇬🇧 1(5)

2(5)

3(5)

4(5)

5(5)

* I have no source

Originally tweeted by Gal.G🕯 🇮🇱 (@GalG____) on January 18, 2022.

End of Covid! All restrictions in England to be scrapped within DAYS

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

ALL covid restrictions in England will end in 10 days, a senior Government source has confirmed.

The end of restrictions means mandatory mask wearing at schools, on public transport and at indoor events, controversial covid passports, and demands that people work from home will finish on January 26.

All that will remain will be a requirement to isolate for five days with a positive covid test and the need to take lateral flow tests for international travel.

link

This is very good news with one caveat: it is possible Omicron, which is lab-made, is showing mild symptoms today but was designed to have severe long-term effects. I hate to rain on the parade and agree that all restrictions should be removed, but even Omicron should be treated early to prevent or diminish possible long-term adverse reactions. ABN

INDIA: No person can be forced to get vaccinated against their wishes: Centre to Supreme Court

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

The Centre said this in its affidavit filed in response to a plea by NGO Evara Foundation seeking door-to-door, priority COVID-19 vaccination for persons with disabilities

The Centre has told the Supreme Court that COVID-19 inoculation guidelines issued by the Union Health Ministry do not envisage forcible vaccination without obtaining the consent of an individual.

On the issue of exempting persons with disabilities from producing vaccination certificates, the Centre told the apex court that it has not issued any SOP that makes it mandatory to carry the vaccination certificate for any purpose.

link

Freedom of choice for medical treatments—especially experimental ones—used to be something Americans were completely confident was an unalienable right. Two years ago few of us could have imagined that today we would be battling totalitarian health authorities on many fronts and losing on some of them. What’s worse is a large number of Americans actually want govt to go further with its autocratic dictates; see this: 45 Percent of Democrats Support Forced Quarantine Camps for Unvaccinated. ABN

Does Big Pharma “own” the bad effects of the vaxxes because they own the patents for some of the ingredients? If so, they are legally liable for what they own

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

OK I've been busy for a mouse and need a break.. but something really important has come up so I'm just going to provide a teaser.

It's about this

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8976696/

A farmer who took on Monsanto in the supreme court and won. It's an internationally recognised case.

Schmeiser vs Monsanto.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Schmeiser

Well, he didn't quite win. Because in the small print was this decision:

Which means, to this day (and the corporations want you to know this).

If something you own is contaminated by a patented product, it is owned by the patent owner.

Not relevant to anything of interest?
#CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG

Continue reading “Does Big Pharma “own” the bad effects of the vaxxes because they own the patents for some of the ingredients? If so, they are legally liable for what they own” →

FLORIDA DRAWS THE LINE ON VACCINES: “The state of Florida is not going to serve as the Biden administration’s biomedical police,” Christina Pushaw, spokesperson for Gov DeSantis

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

There is a contradiction between Florida and federal law regarding vaccines. Companies required by the federal mandate to vaccinate all employees will be fined by Florida if they punish or fire employees who refuse the vaccine.

It’s not clear how the federal government is going to react but unlikely DeSantis will back down.

At a news conference Thursday in Panama City, DeSantis called the federal mandate for health care workers “insane, especially given the ineffectiveness of these shots to actually stop transmission between individuals.” He also said the mandates were contributing to labor shortages in the health care industry.

Biden is both politically weak and nationally unpopular, so pushing his luck on mandates will only bring this issue to a head and make matters worse for him. Yet doing nothing may embolden other governors to follow DeSantis, who seems to have made a good move by sharpening the outlines of this conflict.

“The specific 19 nucleotide long sequence coding for tet furin site is found in an obscure bacterium and a raft of Moderna patents from 2015”

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Dr. Paul – please look into what @JikkyKjj and David Martin have found. Namely that the specific 19 nucleotide long sequence coding for tet furin site is found in an obscure bacterium and a raft of Moderna patents from 2015. Impossible due to chance? We deserve answers.

Originally tweeted by Chris “Early Treatment” Martenson, PhD (@chrismartenson) on January 13, 2022.

More info: How to BLAST your way to the truth about the origins of COVID-19

We know covid-19 was a bioweapon. We highly suspect that Omicron is also a lab-engineered virus, call it a weapon or not; that depends who is using it and why. I am seeing more signs every day that the good guys are showing up. As Biden/Harris/Fauci tank the American people seem more awake than ever. ABN

Robert Barnes on SCOTUS vaccine mandate rulings

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

We won the big one, exactly as forecast — 6 to 3, with the 3 conservatives wanting to go further. I believe the OSHA ruling sets the more significant precedent. What saved the Medicare mandate was 3-fold: first, religious exceptions required in the rule itself; second, the percieved beneficiary is old & poor patients; and third, the history of hospitals mandating vaccines. Very good to see Barrett join the conservatives on the Medicare mandate. All in all, a good day.

link

The religious exception is of magisterial importance and shows we still have something left of our country. Barnes elsewhere has said that the religious exception to vaxxes is fundamentally a matter of “personal conscience,” a point I agree with very strongly. All people, including atheists, have the core right to assert a religious exception based on this reading of the Constitution. No individual should ever give up their right to think, speak, believe, and act on the deep promptings of their conscience. ABN

The OSHA COVID-19 Mandate has been defeated

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Today, the Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration’s (OSHA) COVID-19 vaccine mandate, stating:

“Applicants now seek emergency relief from this Court, arguing that OSHA’s mandate exceeds its statutory authority and is otherwise unlawful. Agreeing that applicants are likely to prevail, we grant their applications and stay the rule.”

You can read the full opinion here. Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan dissented – meaning that Justices Roberts, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Alito, and Gorsuch voted in favor of staying the OSHA Mandate.

The effect of the stay is that the OSHA Mandate is essentially struck. It’s over. It won’t be implemented. In reaching this decision, the Court relied on the major questions doctrine (aka major rules doctrine), which we discussed here in arguing why the OSHA Mandate was unlawful. For those of you keeping score, we made this argument despite Twitter’s assurances that the OSHA Mandate was lawful.

link

“This is very serious – these are the biggest crimes against humanity ever committed in the history of human kind” – Anna de Buisseret, UK Lawyer

~ ABN ~ 1 Comment

In this brilliant interview, lawyer Anna de Buisseret explains clearly and eloquently how those responsible for causing harm will be held liable under the law in relation to the experimental injections currently being rolled out, especially to young children. She describes how those who have explicitly or implicitly aided and abetted governments in a military grade psychological operation have essentially committed crimes against humanity and that they will inevitably be held accountable, as has happened throughout history.

link to video

RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION TO THE VAXXES: This exemption is explained very well by Attorney Robert Barnes. What it is, how to prepare, what to say and do

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

I am reposting this because it is an excellent discussion of the many legal issues surrounding covid mandates and decrees. Barnes knows his stuff and expresses himself very clearly. Importantly, Bares says that religious exemption to the vaxxes or any medical treatment is fundamentally based on “personal conscience.” If that describes you, be sure to watch this vid. ABN

How Dr Brian Tyson “persuaded” CVS to fill his ivermectin prescriptions

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Tyson retained an attorney, Matthew P. Tyson (no relation), to draft a letter that was hand-delivered to the pharmacy. He’s not had any trouble since then.

link

From the lawyer’s letter to pharmacy:

It has come to my attention that your pharmacy has refused to fill valid prescriptions
for ivermectin. Your pharmacy manager told one customer that the refusal was because
ivermectin was not FDA-approved for use in treatment of COVID-19. This same manager
told the prescribing physician that she was “not comfortable” dispensing a prescription for
ivermectin to treat COVID-19 and that there was “no indication” for the prescription.

The FDA does not “approve” uses at all. The FDA merely determines whether to
approve or clear products for marketing and labelling of the “intended use” submitted to it.
To be marketed, a product need only have a single intended use. All treatments beyond
such intended use are a matter of discretionary medical practice by licensed physicians.

New “off-label” uses for drugs are often discovered after the FDA approves a
package insert. Off-label use is legal and widely accepted practice. A manufacturer’s label
is not proscriptive, and does not prohibit use for a longer period, or in any other manner
not described in the labeling. The FDA cannot and does not prohibit physicians from
prescribing off-label use. Any assertion that a prescription is invalid because it is off-label
is utterly devoid of basis in law or fact. It is for the professional judgment of a licensed
physician – and not a pharmacist or the FDA – to determine that an off-label prescription
is appropriate treatment for a patient.

link