Thread: EU Leader Calls for Throwing Out Nuremberg Code

EU Leader Calls for Throwing Out Nuremberg Code

On Wednesday, Ursula Van Der Leyen – the chief of the European Union (EU) Commission – told the press that she would like to see the long-standing Nuremberg Code ignored completely in favor of allowing countries to force vaccinate anyone who is refusing to take the experimental jab.
Her alarming comments come just days after Germany followed Austria’s lead, mandating an authoritarian lockdown on only the unvaccinated.
In addition to being in full support of the segregated lockdown, von der Leyen said it was “understandable and appropriate” for EU countries to discuss mandatory COVID vaccinations.
Forcing individuals to take this experimental and potentially dangerous vaccine against their will would be in direct violation of the Nuremberg Code which was established in 1947 in the immediate wake of the horrific medical experiments and human rights atrocities by Nazis during the Holocaust.
The laws expressly state that
“the voluntary consent of the human subject is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL,”
meaning that the individual is able to
“exercise free power of choice, WITHOUT the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior forms of constraint or coercion“ – i.e taking away your right to work if you are not vaccinated.
A leading cause for the code’s creation was the Nazi’s sickening performance of medical experiments on subjects without their consent. These procedures, typically performed under the command of high-ranking officials such as Dr. Josef Mengele, were some of the worst and most deranged ever documented. Since then, full and proactive ongoing consent for any medical procedure has been required by law in western nations that recognize the Nuremberg Laws.
The only way countries in the EU would be able to get away with forced vaccinations for this mild virus, which is an extraordinarily unethical and atrocious violation of human rights, is to do away with the Nuremberg laws, or just ignore them completely.
SOURCE
Unfortunately for the neo-Nazis, The Penalty For Crimes Against Humanity is the same as it was for the Nazis – DEATH.

Hopefully we’ll see Ms. Van Der Leyen and her ilk swinging before that can inflict more murder on the world.









EU Leader Calls for Throwing Out Nuremberg Code | John C. Carleton (johnccarleton.org)

Forget The Nuremberg Code, EU Chief Says It’s Time To Consider Mandatory Jabs

December 5, 2021 Niamh Harris News 15 Comments

The president of the EU commission Ursula Von Der Leyen told the press on Wednesday that mandatory vaccination must be considered to tackle the spread of the “highly contagious” omicron variant.

The EU chief who is a former medical doctor, said mandatory jabs must be considered as a policy to counter the worryingly low take-up across the bloc while urging the 27 member states to step up their vaccination campaigns.
Her comments appear to suggest that he is in favour of scrapping the long-standing Nuremburg Code and forcing people to get vaccinated against covid.
As podcaster Dr. Jordan Peterson sarcastically pointed out:

“Hey, it’s just the Nuremberg code. Only what we learned from the Nazi atrocities, not least those that were medical”


Dr Jordan B Peterson
@jordanbpeterson

Hey, it's just the Nuremberg code. Only what we learned from the Nazi atrocities, not least those that were medical.



Michael P Senger
@MichaelPSenger

Shortly after Austria became first country to make COVID vaccines compulsory, EU chief Ursula von Der Leyen calls for dispensing with the Nuremberg Code and making vaccination mandatory across Europe. Here’s Ursula last month with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourlahttps://bbc.com/news/world-europe-59497462…






4:14 PM · Dec 1, 2021

The Post Millenniall reports: In Austria, people over 12 who are not vaccinated are currently almost completely locked down, only allowed outside for absolutely essential tasks like food or medical appointments.
In an interview she gave to the BBC, the EU chief said that it was “understandable and appropriate” to consider vaccine mandates, especially due to the new Omicron variant of COVID 19, which has been now detected in 12 different member nations of the EU.
“How we can encourage and potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union? This needs discussion. This needs a common approach, but it is a discussion that I think has to be led,” commented Van Der Leyen to the BBC.
The WHO, however, has strongly encouraged countries not to enact travel bans because of Omicron, and further iterated that early data points to the fact that most Omicron cases are not severe. Most of the world’s governments are not paying attention to the WHO’s guidelines on this occasion, however.
The Nuremberg Code was enacted in 1947, immediately after the Second World War to prevent many of the egregious human rights abuses enacted by the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese during the war.
Especially were at issue the performance of medical procedures on subjects without their consent. These procedures, often performed under the command of people such as Dr. Josef Mengele or Hideki Tojo, often were akin to the worst kinds of torture. Since then, full and proactive ongoing consent has been required.
Reproduced here below is the section of the Nuremberg Code which is in question.




Forget The Nuremberg Code, EU Chief Says It's Time To Consider Mandatory Jabs - News Punch

Oh I bet you do; even Retarded Joey is terrified of people even talking about this one

EU Chief Calls For Trashing the Nuremberg Code

By Sebastian
DEC 4, 2021

Following WWII, the Nuremberg Code established a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation.
After the Nuremberg trials, the code of medical ethics laid the foundation to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects.
It established the principle of voluntary informed consent and ensured individuals the right to control his/her body.
The code has profoundly impacted international human rights law to protect patients from suffering unnecessary pain and injury.

CIRP lists the ten points of the Nuremberg Code:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experimen
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”
If an individual says NO to any medical experiment, they don’t give consent.

Yet, EU Chief Ursula von der Leyen wants to trash this basic code of medical ethics and allow humans to be Big Pharma guinea pigs.
The Nuremberg Code was enacted in 1947 to avoid a repeat of the heinous crimes committed by the Nazis and Imperial Japan.
With the EU Chief favoring a removal of this code of medical ethics, it shows the European Union has the same thought process as those war criminals.

Source: WeLoveTrump

EU Chief Calls For Trashing the Nuremberg Code - DAILY NEWS OF AMERICA

THE NUREMBERG CODE

Video at the page link


Medical Ethics

Medical professionals were put on trial after the war for their participation in war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Holocaust. The trial sparked questions about medical ethics in the aftermath of the brutal experiments on prisoners in the camp system.
Medical Case: US prosecutor details illegal experimentsThe Medical Case was one of 12 war crimes trials held before an American tribunal as part of the Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings. The trial dealt with doctors and nurses who had participated in the killing of physically and mentally impaired Germans and who had performed medical experiments on people imprisoned in concentration camps. Here, chief prosecutor Brigadier General Telford Taylor reads into evidence a July 1942 report detailing Nazi high-altitude experiments and outlines the prosecution's goals for the trial.

• National Archives - Film

• View Archival Details

On December 9, 1946, an American military tribunal opened criminal proceedings against 23 leading German physicians and administrators for their willing participation in war crimes and crimes against humanity. This case is known as the "Doctors Trial" (USA v. Karl Brandt et. al). On August 19, 1947, the judges of the tribunal delivered their verdict. But before announcing the guilt or innocence of each defendant, they confronted the difficult question of medical experimentation on human beings.
Several German doctors had argued in their own defense that their experiments differed little from those conducted before the war by German and American scientists. Furthermore they showed that no international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation. This argument was a great concern to two US doctors who had worked with the prosecution during the trial, Dr. Andrew Ivy and Dr. Leo Alexander.
As a result, on April 17, 1947, Dr. Alexander submitted a memorandum to the United States Counsel for War Crimes. The memo outlined six points that defined legitimate medical research. The trial's verdict of August 19 reiterated almost all of these points in a section entitled "Permissible Medical Experiments." It also revised the original six points into ten, and these ten points became known as the "Nuremberg Code."
In the half century following the trial, the code informed numerous international ethics statements. Its legal force, however, was not well established. Nevertheless, it remains a landmark document on medical ethics and one of the most lasting products of the "Doctors Trial."
Permissible Medical ExperimentsClick here to copy a link to this section

From the trial transcript1
The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
Author(s): United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington, DC



The Nuremberg Code | Holocaust Encyclopedia (ushmm.org)

Its going to get really bad from here

Nuremberg Code of 1947 – refusing the vaccine

Nuremberg Code of 1947 - refusing the vaccine - Vaccine Information, Journals, Studies (anti-vaccines.com)

• HOME
• MUSEUM INFORMATION
• EXHIBITIONS
• ONLINE EXHIBITIONS
• SPECIAL FOCUS
• THE DOCTORS TRIAL: THE MEDICAL CASE OF THE SUBSEQUENT NUREMBERG PROCEEDINGS

Nuremberg Code

Nuremberg Code — United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (ushmm.org)

THE NUREMBERG CODE

Permissible Medical Experiments The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject. Of the ten principles which have been enumerated our judicial concern, of course, is with those requirements which are purely legal in nature — or which at least are so clearly related to matters legal that they assist us in determining criminal culpability and punishment. To go beyond that point would lead us into a field that would be beyond our sphere of competence. However, the point need not be labored. We find from the evidence that in the medical experiments which have been proved, these ten principles were much more frequently honored in their breach than in their observance. Many of the concentration camp inmates who were the victims of these atrocities were citizens of countries other than the German Reich. They were non-German nationals, including Jews and "asocial persons", both prisoners of war and civilians, who had been imprisoned and forced to submit to these tortures and barbarities without so much as a semblance of trial. In every single instance appearing in the record, subjects were used who did not consent to the experiments; indeed, as to some of the experiments, it is not even contended by the defendants that the subjects occupied the status of volunteers. In no case was the experimental subject at liberty of his own free choice to withdraw from any experiment. In many cases experiments were performed by unqualified persons; were conducted at random for no adequate scientific reason, and under revolting physical conditions. All of the experiments were conducted with unnecessary suffering and injury and but very little, if any, precautions were taken to protect or safeguard the human subjects from the possibilities of injury, disability, or death. In every one of the experiments the subjects experienced extreme pain or torture, and in most of them they suffered permanent injury, mutilation, or death, either as a direct result of the experiments or because of lack of adequate follow-up care. Obviously all of these experiments involving brutalities, tortures, disabling injury, and death were performed in complete disregard of international conventions, the laws and customs of war, the general principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all civilized nations, and Control Council Law No. 10. Manifestly human experiments under such conditions are contrary to "the principles of the law of nations as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates of public conscience." Whether any of the defendants in the dock are guilty of these atrocities is, of course, another question Under the Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence every defendant in a criminal case is presumed to be innocent of an offense charged until the prosecution, by competent, credible proof, has shown his guilt to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. And this presumption abides with the defendant through each stage of his trial until such degree of proof has been adduced. A "reasonable doubt" as the name implies is one conformable to reason — a doubt which a reasonable man would entertain. Stated differently, it is that state of a case which, after a full and complete comparison and consideration of all the evidence, would leave an unbiased, unprejudiced, reflective person, charged with the responsibility for decision, in the state of mind that he could not say that he felt an abiding conviction amounting to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge. If any of the defendants are to be found guilty under counts two or three of the indictment it must be because the evidence has shown beyond a reasonable doubt that such defendant, without regard to nationality or the capacity in which he acted, participated as a principal in, accessory to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, or was connected with plans or enterprises involving the commission of at least some of the medical experiments and other atrocities which are the subject matter of these counts. Under no other circumstances may he be convicted. Before examining the evidence to which we must look in order to determine individual culpability, a brief statement concerning some of the official agencies of the German Government and Nazi Party which will be referred to in this judgment seems desirable. Source THE NUREMBERG CODE [from Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg, October 1946–April 1949. Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O, 1949–1953.]

Microsoft Word - nuremburg_code.doc (fhi360.org)

NUREMBERG CODE (DIRECTIVES FOR HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION)

The Nuremberg Military Tribunal’s decision in the case of the United States v Karl Brandt et al. includes what is now called the Nuremberg Code, a ten point statement delimiting permissible medical experimentation on human subjects. According to this statement, humane experimentation is justified only if its results benefit society and it is carried out in accord with basic principles that “satisfy moral, ethical, and legal concepts.” To some extent the Nuremberg Code has been superseded by the Declaration of Helsinki as a guide for human experimentation.–“Permissible Medical Experiments.” Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg October 1946 – April 1949, Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office (n.d.), vol. 2., pp. 181-182.

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required by him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Nuremberg Code (Directives for Human Experimentation) - Office of Research Integrity (marshall.edu)

Nuremberg code will prevent you from having to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.

Nuremberg code will prevent you from having to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.
Prepare For Change / Derek Knauss


From one of our subscribers:
My dear friends around the world,
Again, there are several pieces of information for you to know.
So I will number them as I did the last time
From Andrzej Suda
Plague of Liars: Nuremberg Code Outlaws Forced Medical Procedures, Which INCLUDES Mandatory Vaccinations

Anna Von Reitz
paulstramer.net
Mon, 30 Nov 2020 10:04 UTC

© US Army
The ‘Doctors Trial’ (USA vs Karl Brandt) during the Nuremberg Trials following WW2, which established the Nuremberg Code regulating the ethics of medical intervention

Some people might not be familiar with the verb “to dissemble”, but we all need to become familiar with it, because there is a lot of dissembling going on.
It basically means to deliberately conceal something or obfuscate it, so that one’s attention is misdirected or deflected from whatever the Dissembler wishes to obscure. Like the truth. And in this case, the truth about the Nuremberg Code and the protection it provides us from accepting any forced medical procedure or therapy at all.
Together with casting doubts and slander, dissembling is one of the chief tools in the propagandist toolbox.
A few days ago, I wrote an article explaining that forced vaccinations are a violation of the Nuremberg Code. Note the word, “forced”. In fact, any forced medical procedure or therapy is against the Nuremberg Code.
All medical procedures and therapies must have fully informed and freely given consent, to the greatest extent possible – which means that people who are conscious and able to decide things for themselves remain in control of their medical destiny.
It’s only when you are in desperate straits and unconscious that medical professionals are allowed to step in and make decisions “for you”.
This is all cut and dried and set in cement since the 1940s, but now we have people trying to dissemble it and water it down and reinterpret the Nuremberg Code as applying only to medical experimentation.
It does not.
The Code itself explains exactly what it applies to, and even though the cases giving rise to the Code arose from medical experiments in Concentration Camps and involved forced medical experimentation on unwilling subjects, the core of the Nuremberg Code rose to the occasion and outlawed all kinds of forced medical procedures and therapies. Not just experimental procedures.
Any medical procedure or therapy that you don’t want to participate in, you have the full, free, and unprejudiced right to refuse. Period.
Go back and read Article 6, Sections 1 and 3, of the Nuremberg Code for yourselves.
Don’t take anyone else’s word for it. Not even mine. Be sure. And make good use of the information if anyone comes to your door with a needle in hand.
Another good one to quote in their faces is their own cherished Roe vs. Wade decision, the excuse for allowing abortion on demand. My body, my choice. That applies to every aspect of your body, what you take out and what you put into it, too.
Here is an example of a dissembling ‘news’ article so that you can see exactly how they dissemble the actual important information and misrepresent it to mean something else:
© boomlive.in

The same article draws attention to the fact that the Nuremberg Code doesn’t make vaccination illegal. Who said it did? They are deliberately creating a False Argument as a means to obfuscate.
The Nuremberg Code makes FORCED vaccination illegal – along with all other forced medical procedures and therapies. The Nuremberg Code doesn’t single out vaccinations or any other procedure or therapy – it outlaws all forced procedures and therapies with the same broad brush.
So if you want to be vaccinated, after being fully informed of all the possible downsides and consequences, after understanding exactly what the vaccine contains, after understanding that you will have extremely limited rights of recourse if you voluntarily take the injection and something goes wrong – then you are free to take your chances and do as you will. It’s your choice.
The Nuremberg Code won’t protect you from your own fully disclosed consent.
But it will protect you from being imposed upon by politicians and “private security forces” hired by banks that are colluding in this scheme to defraud America under color of law.
The Nuremberg Code gives you full standing, if they attempt to violate it and force any kind of involuntary or undisclosed vaccination on you by any means – whether by wrestling you to the ground or by threatening to deprive you of any other right or privilege, including the right to travel and use public facilities.
All indications are that we are entering a very dark chapter in American history. You will need to stay alert and stay informed, and you are not being given straight information from any of the commercial media channels or their acolytes and paid trolls. You need to read things with a critical eye and be able to discern the tricks the propagandists employ.
Now read the actual Nuremberg Code Sections – Article 6, Sections 1 and 3.
Then stand your solid ground against forced medical procedures of any kind and also against all the dissembling BS artists out there, because they are multiplying like bunnies in spring. You can take a stand against this Plague of Liars, by joining other like-minded and alert Americans who have reclaimed their birthright political standing and who are now undertaking the responsibility of self-governance – concerning their health and all other matters – via their State Assembly.

1. https://www.sott.net/article/445396-...A6chOjy-2e_GlY

The Nuremberg Code and the ethics against the upcoming forceful vaccinochipization



Vaccination / chipization is moving by leaps and bounds and people around the world are already starting to think about how to avoid this miraculous manipulation. Of course, no one knows the laws, but in different countries the laws are also different, however, there is a universal law. It is called the Nuremberg Code.



The Nuremberg Code is an international document regulating the principles of conducting medical experiments and procedures on people. The Code was developed and adopted after the Nuremberg trial of doctors in 1947, as a result of which many, many citizens were sent to the gallows, in particular for the forcible administration of different vaccines to people. The code has only ten points and it reads:
1. The absolutely necessary condition for conducting an experiment on a person is the voluntary consent of the latter.
2. The experiment should bring positive results to the society, unattainable by other methods or research methods; it should not be random, essentially non-binding in nature.
3. The experiment should be based on data obtained in laboratory studies on animals, knowledge of the history of the development of this disease or other studied problems. Its holding should be organized in such a way that the expected results justify the fact of its holding.
4. When conducting an experiment, it is necessary to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and damage.
5.None of the experiments should be carried out if there is reason to assume the possibility of death or a disabling injury to the subject; an exception, perhaps, may be cases when research physicians act as subjects in carrying out their experiments.


6. The degree of risk associated with the experiment should never exceed the humanitarian importance of the problem that the experiment is aimed at
7. The experiment should be preceded by appropriate training, and its implementation should be provided with the equipment necessary to protect the subject from the slightest possibility of injury, disability or death.
8. The experiment should be carried out only by persons with scientific qualifications. At all stages of the experiment, those who conduct it or are engaged in it require maximum attention and professionalism.
9. During the experiment, the subject should be able to stop him if, in his opinion, his physical or mental state makes it impossible to continue the experiment.
10. During the experiment, the researcher responsible for carrying out the experiment should be prepared to terminate it at any stage if professional considerations, conscientiousness and caution in the judgments required of it, give reason to believe that the continuation of the experiment may lead to injury, disability or death test subject.

As American lawyers write, the key points are 1 and 6 – that is, the person involved in the vaccination must be capable to give consent; a person should be able to exercise freedom of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, deception, coercion, direct or hidden; the person must possess sufficient knowledge and understanding of the elements of the subject in question. The next universal legal document is called Article 6 of the 2005 UNESCO statement on bioethics and human rights. It is written there:

Article 6, section 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical interventions should be carried out only with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned on the basis of adequate information. If necessary, consent must be expressed and can be revoked by the person concerned at any time and for any reason.
Article 6, section 3: In no case shall the collective agreement of the community or the consent of the community leader or other authority be a substitute for the informed consent of individuals.

Thus, any orders of a particular Parliament or a celebrated supreme leader on compulsory vaccination will violate Article 6 of the UNESCO statement on human rights and bioethics. Along the way, they violate the Nuremberg Code, in particular Article 1 and Article 6. It is still unknown how the authorities of different countries will try to circumvent these fundamental ethical documents.

This link is the Nuremberg Code:
https://www.soulask.com/the-nurember...nochipization/
Within the first link is this link:
https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/co...ditions-possi1
Please notice the advice to contact your legislators
in this third link. Thank you.
2. Here is a calendar for 2021 as to what you can expect
if we don’t demand that this outrage end as the Danes did
of their government a few weeks ago:
The New World Order Plan
12/20 to 12/21
December 2020 – Field hospitals set up in each county
January 2021 – Full lockdown, all jobs stopped, all businesses closed
February 2021 – Reform on all benefits
March 2021 – New infection COVID21 different strain much more deadly than COVID19
April 2021 – Hospitals unable to cope. COVID19 vaccination available
May 2021 – Government sets new pay structures for workers including a new minimum wage
June 2021 – Shops running out of supplies commonplace. Local protests common. Army checkpoints get set up in each town.
July 2021 – National civil unrest takes off, local governments start pulling out. COVID21 vaccine developed.
August 2021 – Early plans for new government structure. First full vaccination rolled out of COVID19.
September 2021 – All debts cancelled if you get vaccinated against COVID19 and COVID21. New law cancels all property ownership and passed it to the government.
October 2021 – Introduction of COVID passports in digital and card format. Only those vaccinated can work and travel.
November 2021 – COVID19&21 vaccines become mandatory
December 2021 – COVID passports change name to Health passports and become accepted as the normal way of life.
Moroccan Sunset
We’ve all been telling you this would be happening!!!
Wake…up.
If you would like to see this section as a PDF, just ask me for
COVID is Communist takeover 002 (1 page)
3. http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=223621
God bless,
Arlene Johnson
Publisher/Author
http://www.truedemocracy.net
To access my e-zine, which is top secret history that’s internationally acclaimed,
and free to the world, click on the icon that says Magazine.
Original Article: https://prepareforchange.net/2021/01...vid-19-vaccine

Nuremberg code will prevent you from having to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. | Truth11.com