Mandatory Kill Shot Vaccines Are on Their Way, Says the Watchman. Do You Intend to Accept or Refuse the Kill Shot COVID-19 Vaccine When It Becomes Available, as 39% of Those Polled Say? If You Refuse the Kill Shot, You Will Be Breaking the Law,Tribulation In play
SRH: Pale Horse In Play: Mandatory Kill Shots are on the Horizon. Almost Every Government on the Planet Plans on Implementing Forced Kill Shots or Faces a Financial Burden in the Way of Fines and Taxes, Coming 2022-2023-Spring 2024
HNewsWire: One of the most common questions I am asked from the unvaccinated stems from concerns over “shedding.”
Because the mRNA vaccines have been in development by the US Department of Defense DARPA since 2011, one would have expected that all of the necessary preclinical testing would have been completed before Operation Warp Speed was announced. The 2015 FDA guidance on Gene Product Shedding Studies with gene therapies, which are defined as “all products that exert their effects by transcription and/or translation of transferred genetic material and/or by integration into the host genome and that are administered in the form of nucleic acids, viruses or genetically modified microorganisms”.
In the most comprehensive paper on shedding thus far, former Inserm researcher Dr. Helene Banoun has published the basis for which there is great likelihood that mRNA either on lipid nanoparticles or within exosomes is circulatory in blood and is secreted in every body secretion that would naturally expect to contain particles of this size.
Fertig et al, have shown mRNA is circulatory in blood for at least two weeks with no reduction in concentration out to that time point.[iv] Likewise, Hanna et al, have found mRNA within breast milk.[v] Less data exist on Spike protein shedding but it is not a far stretch to understand this is well within the realm of reality.
HNewsWire: Do you plan to get the COVID-19 vaccine when it’s available, or will you ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ refuse it, as 39% of those polled say? If you refuse it, will you be going against the law?
- According to Alan Dershowitz’s interpretation of Constitutional law, you only have the right to refuse to be vaccinated against a disease that would affect only you. You do not have the right to refuse a contagious disease that might spread to others
- As the basis and justification for his legal orientation on this issue, Dershowitz relies on a 1905 Supreme Court ruling in the matter of Jacobson v. Massachusetts
- According to Robert F. Kennedy, there is a “big Constitutional chasm” between this 1905 case and today’s vaccine mandates. Jacobson sued to avoid the vaccine and the fine for refusing the vaccine, which was $5. When he lost, he paid the fine. There’s a big difference between paying a small fine, and being forcibly injected with a potentially hazardous vaccine, against your will
- According to a recent poll, about half of Americans say they want to get the COVID-19 vaccine; 27% say they will “definitely” refuse and another 12% say they will “probably” refuse it
- 1 in 40 people — not 1 in 1 million — are injured by vaccines, and a clinician who administers vaccines will have an average of 1.3 adverse vaccine events per month
- Kill Shot
- KIll Shot
Leave a Comment