Wednesday, 20 November 2024

 

Dr. Francis Boyle Provides Affidavit: COVID 19 mRNA Nanoparticle Injections Are Biological Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction

Law Professor That Wrote 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act Provides Affidavit

Dr. Francis Boyle, the Harvard educated law professor that drafted the 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act, which passed both houses of Congress unanimously, provided an affidavit stating that Covid 19 injections and mRNA nanoparticle injections violate the law he wrote. Dr. Boyle asserted that ‘COVID 19 injections’, ‘COVID 19 nanoparticle injections’, and ‘mRNA nanoparticle injections’ are biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction and violate Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023).Dr. Boyle provided this affidavit in a Florida case filed by Dr. Joseph Sansone involving an Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus that seeks to compel Governor DeSantis to prohibit the distribution of ‘COVID 19 injections’, ‘COVID 19 nanoparticle injections’, and ‘mRNA nanoparticle injections’, in the state of Florida. It also seeks to compel Attorney General Ashley Moody to confiscate the vials.

The original Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus was filed on March 3rd, 2024, in the Florida Supreme Court. It was then transferred to the Circuit Court in Leon County on March 20th, 2024. On April 9th, 2024, the Circuit Court dismissed the case. The case is now in the appellate court. The Appellate Briefwas filed on Memorial Day, May 27th, 2024.

Share

The pleadings assert that the distribution of ‘COVID 19 injections’, ‘COVID 19 nanoparticle injections’, and ‘mRNA nanoparticle injections’, violate – Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023); Federal Crime of Treason 18 USC § 2381; Treason § 876.32 Fla. Stat. (2023); Domestic Terrorism, 18 USC § 2331; Terrorism § 775.30 Fla. Stat. (2023); Murder § 782.04 (1)(a) Fla. Stat. (2023); and Genocide 18 USC §1091; Florida Drugs and Cosmetic Act § 499.005 (2) Fla. Stat. (2023); Fraud § 817.034 Fla Stat. (2023); Accessory After the Fact § 777.03 Fla. Stat. (2023); and Florida Medical Consent Law § 766.103 Fla Stat. (2023).

Dr. Boyle is considered one of the world’s leading legal experts on biological weapons. Dr. Boyle’s affidavit adds a tremendous amount of credibility to the case, which already has a tremendous body of evidence provided in the writ of mandamus. Affidavits stating that the injections are biological and technological weapons, were also provided by med legal advisor and biotech analyst Karen Kingston, who researched the evidence that makes of the Facts of the Case section of the Mandamus, and from Ana Mihalcea, M.D., PhD. Dr. Mihalcea’s research is included in the Mandamus. Dr. Mihalcea is one of the world’s leading researchers into the effects of self replicating nanotechnology in the blood of injected as well as the effects in the blood of the uninjected as a result of shedding.

Dr. Boyle’s affidavit is below:

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Don’t Miss Out on Global Research Online e-Books! 

Featured image source


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’Γ©tat under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

Learn more from my books…

Resisting Medical Tyranny

Palestine, Palestinians & Int’l Law

 

FDA Plan to Get Antibiotics Out of Factory Farm Animals Is Failing

Nearly eight years ago the FDA effectively banned farmers from using medically important antibiotics to boost growth in livestock. The agency says the plan is working, but veterinarians and advocates for cutting antimicrobial use in farm animals say the data suggest otherwise.

factory farm pigs and fda inside magnifying glass

Nearly eight years ago the FDA effectively banned farmers from using medically important antibiotics to boost growth in livestock. The agency says the plan is working, but veterinarians and advocates for cutting antimicrobial use in farm animals say the data suggest otherwise.

By Natasha Gilbert 

Antimicrobials are widely used to treat or prevent disease in farm animals across the U.S. More of these medically important drugs are sold for use in livestock than for humans each year.

Using antimicrobials gives illness-causing bacteria a chance to develop ways to evade them — a problem that killed 1.14 million people globally in a single year, topping deaths from HIV and malaria combined.

What’s more, mortality is expected to grow by nearly 70% over the next 25 years, reaching a similar scale to the COVID-19 pandemic.

To tackle the crisis, nearly eight years ago the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) effectively banned farmers from using medically important antimicrobials to boost growth in livestock — a practice regarded by many researchers, veterinarians and advocates as excessive and unnecessary.

Antimicrobials are a group of drugs that kill microorganisms including bacteria, viruses and fungi.

The FDA contends that the widely welcomed ban, along with some other reforms, have led to “significant and sustained” changes in the use of antimicrobials on farms.

But advocates for cutting the use of antimicrobials warn that the FDA’s assertions are “disingenuous.”

New data shows sales are falling, says FDA 

Using fewer antimicrobials is crucial to help preserve important medicines for the good health of people and animals, say scientists.

“Every time we use an antimicrobial, microorganisms are going to adapt and resistance can develop,” says Javier Yugueros-Marcos, head of antimicrobial resistance at the World Organization for Animal Health, the global authority on animal health based in Paris, France.

At a meeting at the United Nations in September, global leaders acknowledged that antimicrobial resistance is one of the most urgent global health threats and promised to “meaningfully reduce” the amount of antimicrobials used in animal agriculture globally over the next six years to help tackle the crisis.

However, they failed to set clear targets to lower use following pushback from the U.S. and other meat-producing nations.

The FDA says its efforts are gaining ground. On Oct. 10, the agency published new data that it says suggests a healthy overall downward trend in the volume of antimicrobials sold for use in livestock.

Annual sales of antimicrobials are often taken as a rough indication of the amount used in farm animals, although not all drugs sold will be consumed. (The FDA doesn’t yet routinely collect data on how much antimicrobial farmers actually use.)

In a summary analysis of the new data, the FDA highlights that sales fell by 2% from 2022 to 2023 and by 37% since 2015. Most of these gains come from a big drop in sales as farmers geared up to meet the ban on using antimicrobials to boost growth.

In a statement to U.S. Right to Know, an FDA official wrote that the agency believes “the overall trend in volume of sales indicate a significant and sustained change in how antimicrobials are sold and distributed in food-producing animals.”

But veterinarians and advocates for cutting antimicrobial use in farm animals warn that sales are actually growing for some livestock species.

After an initial drop, sales began creeping back up

Steven Roach, who works on safe and healthy food at the Food Animal Concerns Trust (FACT), a campaign group, says that after an initial welcome drop, sales began to rebound after the ban came into force.

“We can all agree that what the FDA did had an impact,” he says.

But the impact is limited and the drop in sales wasn’t big enough, he adds.

Roach calculated a small drop in sales between 2022 and last year but a 6.9% rise from 2017. His calculations take account of changes in the size and weight of livestock populations, clarifying that shifts in sales are not due to fluctuations in animal numbers.

The initial drop in U.S. sales is largely due to big cuts made in chicken and turkey farming with the former sector slashing sales in half since 2017 and dropping a further 4.6% between 2022 and last year, says Roach.

Less progress is seen in pigs and cattle. Roach calculated a small drop in sales for pigs between 2022 and 2023, but a 24% rise since 2017. Sales for cattle rose by 1.5% between 2022 and 2023 and jumped by 10% since 2017, he says.

Gail Hansen, a public health veterinarian and former state epidemiologist and public health veterinarian for the Kansas Department for Health and Environment, agrees.

“Things are creeping back up,” she says.

Randall Singer, a veterinarian and epidemiologist who researches antimicrobial resistance in poultry at the University of Minnesota, says that the poultry industry — with which he works closely — has reduced its use of antimicrobials “almost to the bare minimum.”

But notes that the use of antimicrobials will fluctuate as diseases ebb and flow.

Farmers of other livestock species should reassess their use of antimicrobials, he says. But they must take care when changing their practices.

“You keep tweaking the system until you know that you can safely pull that antibiotic practice out of your system and not have the consequence of severe animal health and welfare issues,” he says.

FDA assertions of progress are disingenuous  

David Wallinga, formerly a physician and scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council — an environmental organization — also found upward trends in sales in research that he co-authored.

Wallinga, who now sits on the steering committee of Keep Antibiotics Working, an advocacy group based in the U.S., says the FDA is “unnecessarily soft on the major corporations” that promoted the overuse of antibiotics on farms and has fallen short of its “weak promises” to tackle the problem.

Consequently, U.S. farmers are lagging behind their European counterparts.

Farmers in Europe stopped using antimicrobials to boost growth over a decade prior to those in the U.S. They also no longer use antimicrobials routinely to prevent disease.

Antimicrobials on European farms have dropped by around 43% over nine years up to 2020 at which point use on the continent was over 80% lower than in the U.S., Wallinga’s research shows.

In contrast, routine use of antimicrobials is common on U.S. farms, particularly in intensive and confined operations where large numbers of animals are housed in close quarters and animal welfare and sanitation standards are lower, says Hansen.

Wallinga says the FDA’s assertions that it has achieved large and sustained cuts in antimicrobial use and resistance are “disingenuous.”

“The Center for Veterinary Medicine chooses to act in subtle ways to veil their misdirection and inaction in a smokescreen of unclear language, excuses, and lack of transparency,” he says of the FDA body in charge of regulating animal medicines and which leads the agency’s efforts on antimicrobial resistance.

In a statement to U.S. Right to Know, an FDA official acknowledged that sales rebounded after the ban — which the agency puts at around 9% between 2017 and 2018 — but says that numbers have remained relatively stable at a reduced level since then.

“It would be unrealistic to expect sales of medically important antimicrobials for food producing animals to decrease every year,” the official adds.

Reading patterns of bacterial resistance is hard

The FDA says that its efforts to cut antimicrobial use are associated with reductions in resistance among key bacteria — principally Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Enterococcus.

The former is a common bacteria that infects the intestines of people and livestock causing diarrhea, urinary tract infections and pneumonia. The latter can also infect the urinary tract and the lining of the heart.

Scientists suggest that as the use of antimicrobials drops, resistance should also drop, although a direct link between cutting drug use and reducing bacterial resistance is difficult to prove.

In a letter dated Sept. 17, the agency told Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) that “a concomitant decline in resistance” among these bacteria are “important indicators of change.”

The FDA’s comments were in response to a letter from Booker asking the agency for a progress report on its strategy to tackle antimicrobial use in livestock.

But researchers say that reading trends in resistance to antimicrobials isn’t straightforward.

Independent academic research, and data from the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, a collaborative program run by the government, state and local public health departments and universities, shows that resistance to antimicrobials is falling for some bacteria and some drugs but rising for others.

And resistance in poultry and cattle is faring better than in swine.

Csaba Varga, an infectious disease epidemiologist who researches antimicrobial resistance in animals and people at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, says that resistance to the most crucial antimicrobials such as cephalosporins that treat infections like pneumonia and meningitis generally remains low. But there are some worrying shifts, he says.

Do you have a news tip? We want to hear from you!

Contact Us

Antimicrobial resistance to critical medicines is rising 

In research published last year, Varga found rising resistance to cephalosporins in E. coli samples taken from pigs. He also found E. coli with very high resistance to other less critical antibiotics like ampicillin, a penicillin derivative used to treat infections like meningitis.

Varga also notes a “concerning” emergence of resistance to fluoroquinolones — another critical group of antimicrobials — in campylobacter, a bacteria commonly found in undercooked poultry and other meats that can cause severe gastrointestinal infections in people.

He is also worried about evidence of growing resistance in salmonella, another common cause of food poisoning, to beta-lactam antibiotics, a class that includes cephalosporins.

Madeleine Kleven, an analyst for FACT, says that looking at the proportion of drug groups with no resistance to bacteria such as E. coli can also show how they are holding up.

The National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System data show that the percentage of chicken samples with no resistant E. coli is growing but in swine, it’s dropping, she says.

“Whatever the chicken industry is doing is working,” she says.

Mohsen Naghavi, a health metrics scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, who works on antimicrobial resistance, says that it’s difficult to parse an overall picture of the battle against antimicrobial resistance by looking at trends in bacteria.

“Every pathogen and drug combination has a separate story,” he says.

Instead, he prefers to gauge progress by looking at patterns in human mortality from antimicrobial resistance. Globally, more people are dying from it today than three decades ago.

Between 1990 and 2021, deaths from antimicrobial resistance grew by 80% in people 70 years and older but fell by around 50% in children younger than 5 years old, leading to a slight increase in overall mortality.

An FDA spokesperson said in a statement that the agency’s responses to Booker’s letter “adequately summarize” its accomplishments and the challenges it faces.

But to understand the impact the policies have had, research is needed to compare the resistance patterns before and after the policy changes, says Varga.

To make real headway in the battle against antimicrobial resistance, U.S. farmers must further reduce their need for antimicrobials by improving living conditions and the welfare of animals in intensive farming operations, including by reducing animals’ stress, the density in which they are kept and vaccinating them against diseases says Yugueros-Marcos.

These improvements will help prevent infections from occurring in the first place, says Naghavi.

“Preventing infections is the most important factor for the control of antimicrobial resistance. When you do not have infections you do not have resistant bacteria,” he says.

The FDA must acknowledge that these kinds of changes are needed to ensure healthier animals on US farms, says Wallinga.

Instead, the FDA “echoes the industry claim that continuing the routine use of antibiotics is necessary for animal health.”

Originally published by U.S. Right to Know

Natasha Gilbert is an investigative journalist covering industrial animal agriculture.

 

Study Showing ‘High Likelihood’ of Link Between COVID Vaccines and Death Republished in Peer-reviewed Journal

The largest COVID-19 vaccine autopsy study to date has been republished in a peer-reviewed journal after twice being censored. The study’s lead author said it provides “robust evidence” that the vaccines can cause death, meeting the FDA’s criteria for “an immediate market withdrawal.”

covid vaccines and increasing chart with word "death"

COVID

November 18, 2024

covid vaccines and increasing chart with word "death"

Listen to this article

The largest COVID-19 vaccine autopsy study to date has been republished in a peer-reviewed journal — after twice being censored, according to Nicolas Hulscher, the paper’s lead author and an epidemiologist at theMcCullough Foundation.

Science, Public Health Policy and the Law on Nov. 17 published the study, which had been previously withdrawn from Preprints with The Lancet and Forensic Science International.

Hulscher told The Defender the study’s republication signals a “pivotal victory for transparency and accountability in science.” It also marks “a significant setback” for actors in the biopharmaceutical complex and “their Academic Publishing Cartel,” Hulscher said.

Hulscher’s co-authors include Dr. Harvey RischDr. Peter A. McCullough and Dr. William Makis.

Hulscher told The Defender the study provides “robust evidence that COVID-19 vaccines can cause death. This means that the FDA’s [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] criteria for a Class I recall have been fulfilled, warranting an immediate market withdrawal.”

The FDA defines a Class I product recall as “a situation in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”

Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Defender that the COVID-19 vaccine spike protein “can stay around in some people and continue to do inflammatory damage in any site where it gets to through the bloodstream.”

In ‘striking act of censorship’ publishers withdraw study, shut down debate

The study’s publication in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law is the latest twist in an ongoing saga as the authors have tried to get their research out to the public and scientific community, Hulscher wrote on Substack.

The study results were first made public on July 5, 2023, as a preprint with The Lancet on SSRN, an open-access research platform.

However, Preprints with The Lancet removed the study from the server within 24 hours, posting a statement that the study’s conclusions were “not supported by the study methodology,” The Daily Sceptic reported.

McCullough told The Epoch Times that the study was experiencing “hundreds of reviews per minute” before its removal.

Preprint servers offer a place for the public to view scientific reports and papers while they undergo peer review, making scientific findings available immediately and for free and opening them up to broader public debate.

The authors subsequently posted on theZenodo preprint server, while the review underwent peer review at Forensic Science International. It was downloaded over 130,000 times.

On June 21, 2024, after successful peer review, Forensic Science International published the study.

Within weeks, the study became the top trending research paper worldwide across all subject areas, according to the Observatory of International Research, Hulscher recalled.

“Unfortunately,” Hulscher wrote on Substack, “in a striking act of censorship, Elsevier and Forensic Science International withdrew the article on August 2nd, 2024 in flagrant violation of their own withdrawal policy andCOPE guidelines.”

He said they “left no traces behind, completely wiping our paper from the webpage.”

Elsevier and Forensic Science International said that “members of the scientific community” — who remained anonymous, Hulscher pointed out — cited numerous concerns about the study, including inappropriate citation references, inappropriate methodological design and a lack of factual support for its conclusions.

The concerns were “unfounded,” Hulscher wrote. The study authors wrote a rebuttal defending their study and submitted a revised manuscript. However, Elsevier and Forensic Science International rejected the revised manuscript.

Hulscher noted that Elsevier and Forensic Science International “failed to follow the proper scientific discourse method of allowing debate in Letters to the Editor.” Instead, they shut down the possibility of debate by censoring the study.

“This type of academic censorship poses a serious threat to the progress of scientific discovery,” he said.

Do you have a news tip? We want to hear from you!

Contact Us

73.9% of deaths reviewed by authors linked to COVID vaccines

As The Defender previously reported, the study authors did a systematic review of studies on autopsy findings following COVID-19 vaccination.

They first searched PubMed and ScienceDirectfor all published autopsy and necropsy — another word for autopsy — reports related to COVID-19 vaccination in which the death occurred after vaccination.

They screened out 562 duplicate studies among the 678 studies initially identified in their search. Other papers were removed because they lacked information about vaccination status.

Ultimately, they evaluated 44 papers containing 325 autopsies and one necropsy case. Three physicians independently reviewed each case and adjudicated whether or not the COVID-19 shot was the direct cause or contributed significantly to the death reported.

They found 240 of the deaths (73.9%) were found to be “directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.” The mean age for death was 70.4 years old.

Primary causes of death included sudden cardiac death, which happened in 35% of cases, pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction, which occurred in 12.5% and 12% of the cases respectively.

Other causes included vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia,myocarditis, multisystem inflammatory syndrome and cerebral hemorrhage.

Most deaths occurred within a week of the last shot.

The authors concluded that because the deaths were highly consistent with the known mechanisms for COVID-19 vaccine injury, it was highly likely the deaths were causally linked to the vaccine.

They said the findings “amplify” existing concerns about the vaccines, including those related to vaccine-induced myocarditis and myocardial infarction and the effects of the spike protein more broadly.

They also said the studies have implications for unanticipated deaths among vaccinated people with no previous illness. “We can infer that in such cases, death may have been caused by COVID-19 vaccination,” they wrote.

This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write. 

Please Donate Today

The authors acknowledged some potential biases in the article.

First, they said, their conclusions from the autopsy findings are based on an evolving understanding of the vaccines, which are currently different from when the studies evaluated were published.

They also noted that systematic reviews have bias potential in general because of biases that may exist at the level of the individual papers and their acceptance into the peer-reviewed literature.

They said publication bias could have affected their results because the global push for mass vaccination has made investigators hesitant to report adverse events.

They also said their research did not account for confounding variables like concomitant illnesses, drug interactions and other factors that may have had a causal role in the reported deaths.

 

Alberta’s Premier Danielle Smith Seeks the Imprisonment of Dr. William Makis, Distinguished Oncologist Committed to the Truth, Spread the Word

AHS and Danielle Smith want Jan. 15, 2025 Court date to imprison me for 83 days

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney destroyed his political career when he ordered AHS to persecute Christian Pastors during the lockdown. It remains the biggest political blunder in history. Jason Kenney cannot show his face in public now, and won’t for the rest of his life. 

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is the first Canadian leader to work with corrupt health bureaucrats (AHS) to have a Canadian doctor (myself) imprisoned for protecting his family. They are demanding that I be imprisoned for 83 days and today they were shopping for a Court date: Jan. 15, 2025.

Why is she doing this? I don’t know exactly, but it’s an extremely bad sign for Alberta and Canada in general.

UCP is also going after Carrie Sakamoto’s COVID-19 Vaccine Injury class action lawsuit, asking for it to be thrown out before it gets heard in Court. 

Remember, Stephen Harper is pro big pharma, pro mRNA vaccine, pro lockdowns, pro vaccine mandates and pro vaccine passports (pro UN, pro WHO and pro WEF).

.

.

Big pharma has fully captured Alberta at the UCP AGM – we are now at the mercy of the UN and WHO, who will run this province through AHS, we are headed for lockdowns and mandatory injections maybe by January? 

God bless you all who kept Danielle Smith’s phone lines ringing all day (780-427-2251) and who are writing her emails, keeping her staff busy. 

.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Don’t Miss Out on Global Research Online e-Books! 

Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.

Featured image: Alberta premier Danielle Smith (Source: Global News / YouTube)

  Dr. Francis Boyle Provides Affidavit: COVID 19 mRNA Nanoparticle Injections Are Biological Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction Law Pro...