Premeditated Vaccine Harm and Punitive Damages
Despite heavy censorship, the internet enables dissidents to amass information about the harm caused by Covid policies in general, and the RNA jabs in particular. Could this end in the destruction of the vaccine companies?
Today’s offering is a discussion among four professionals, including the German consumer protection lawyer Reiner Fuellmich and Sam White, a UK medical practitioner, about the harm done by RNA ‘vaccines’ which are being distributed under increasingly coercive and authoritarian states in Europe and parts of North America.
It has been realised for some time that the deaths and other serious side effects caused by the jabs seem to have been caused by a minority of batches of the RNA therapies, said to be 5% or fewer. Does that mean that most batches of the jabs have been placebos and contained no ‘vaccine’ at all, or perhaps a much lower concentration of it? Does it mean that initially there was something wrong, which was some kind of honest mistake?
What is being discussed here is analysis carried out by Mike Yeadon and others. It suggests that each vaccine company has been regularly cycling batches of its RNA therapies which vary in terms of their potential adverse consequences. It’s not a teething problem, because the pattern has continued over time long after an accidental problem would have been addressed. It seems to be part of the companies’ trials on their own product. For whatever reason, the companies seem to be testing the harmful effects of different versions of these untested revolutionary genetic modification therapies.
Every so often a batch that is more likely to cause death and other serious injuries is being put out. After an uptick in deaths there will then be a quiet period as many more apparently inoffensive batches are released by that company. Meanwhile other companies release dangerous batches of their own. They appear to be taking it in turns, each being given a clear run at trying out variants of its own product. They are colluding to put out products which they know will cause death and serious injury.
If this is true, there are a number points and consequences to consider:
If the companies are deliberately and regularly issuing batches or lots which they know to be much more dangerous than the usual run of jabs, then that would explain why adverse reactions seem to be caused by a small minority of such batches. It would mean that most batches would not contain obviously or immediately harmful substances – making detection of more harmful ingredients much harder.
It also means that companies are engaging in behaviour which is malicious and criminal. They are, either deliberately or recklessly, making the general public engage in a corporately controlled game of Russian roulette. From the discussion it seems that 1 in 200 batches may be very dangerous. Another small percentage of batches may be testing out less harmful but still damaging formulations.
And this behaviour means that a large number of individuals must be colluding to behave this way. We are after all dealing with companies like Pfizer that have been fined for unethical behaviour many times and are seeking to keep the ingredients of their potions secret for over fifty years, which should not inspire confidence.
The vaccine companies have been protected for decades against general legal liability for injuries caused by their products, and the producers of the RNA vaccine have got specific exemption from product liability claims. But this does not cover criminal activity. And such activity, which appears to be happening, if this analysis is correct, also means punitive damages may be sought at least in America. These can be over twenty times the actual damages caused by the malefactor.
The official and much understated USA VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Reaction System) shows more than 10,000 deaths and nearly a million other adverse reactions – including strokes, heart attacks and temporary or permanent blindness or paralysis. If Dr Peter McCullough (see recent www.awah.uk post ‘Joe Rogan Interviews Dr Peter McCullough) is correct in supposing that 100,000 have died in America, then the scale of damages which could be awarded against the vaccine companies could destroy them.
The American legal system, for all its faults and failings, more closely resembles the kind of customary restitution/damages based legal system which would exist in a free, non-state society. We know this because systems of non-state law always prioritise making victims whole at least financially, rather than doing the will of the unpleasant people to be found in the corridors of power.
The profound decentralisation of the US system has protected the law from some of the deforming power of Washington. England shares the same originally customary or ‘Common Law’ system, but years of statute driven modification under a centralised state have greatly weakened it. As for the Continent, the statist legacy of Roman Law based systems is showing once again its uselessness for protecting individuals from the powers that be.
Whatever is going on exactly with this Covid-19 fiasco and the accompanying abusive behaviour by politicians, officials, and privileged corporate interests, one thing is clear. There is no going back. The ‘Old Normal’ gave far too much privilege to the powerful in Government, Healthcare, Finance and the Media. They merely continued to use it to feather their nests at the expense of credulous and trusting populaces.
As explored at the end of the discussion on the video, if this is what has really been going on, these dysfunctional systems must expect root and branch reform after this crisis. That would be the real true Great Reset.
This is the link to the BitChute video discussed in this post. It is unfortunately a little curtailed at the beginning. Please persevere, and make of it what you will:
In what may be a straw in the wind, as reported on Zerohedge, the CEO of Indianapolis based insurance company OneAmerica has revealed that mortality for those aged 18-64 amongst his customers has risen 40% above pre-pandemic levels in the third and fourth quarters of the year, in other words during the period when vaccine mandates were introduced by many employers in America.
OneAmerica is a $100 billion company with 2,400 employees, so it must be assumed to be a credible source. He is quoted as saying ‘Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three sigma or a one-in-200 year catastrophe would be a 10% increase … So, 40% is just unheard of’. Separately, hospitalisations in Indiana are reported to be higher than at any time in the last five years. Claims for short term and now long-term disability are also rising.
More information will be needed before it can be shown that harm from RNA vaccines is responsible for this upsurge, but insurance companies have every incentive to adjust prices to discourage the irresponsible. Perhaps employers who coerced employees into taking the RNA jabs will find that they are paying higher rather than lower insurance premia, as well as being sued by those who have been injured as a result.