The Covid19 Assembly are spearheading a legal case against the MHRA to challenge the temporary authorisation of Covid-19 vaccines for children aged 12 to 15.
On behalf of many extremely concerned parents the Covid19 Assembly is taking legal action to challenge the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)’s decision to approve the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine for use in 12-15 year olds.
We have assembled a world class group of experts doctors and scientists, including renowned Canadian pathologist Dr Roger Hodkinson MA, MB, FRCPC, FCAP, the US specialist in mRNA vaccines Dr Robert Malone MD, MS, South African-born medical doctor and research design analyst residing in the UK Dr Tess Lawrie MBBCh DFSRH PhD, British paediatrician Dr Ros Jones MD FRCPCH and many others. We now need, without delay, to fund preparations for Judicial Review of the MHRA’s decision.
We have a strong case
We have substantial evidence we are satisfied clearly establishes that there is no legal, moral or medical justification for children to receive this treatment. There can be no argument that this ‘vaccine’ is novel and comes with associated risks. It has not yet completed clinical trials to demonstrate efficacy beyond a few months and therefore there simply can be no long-term safety data.
Niall McEvoy is an ice hockey player who has represented Ireland for the past thirteen years. He was a key member of the squad that won the silver medal at the 2017 Development Cup in Andorra.
This morning, Niall emailed his team mates and the coaches of the Irish National Ice Hockey team to tender his resignation. In the emotional email, Niall said that he “can no longer represent a country that has approved of the discrimination and segregation between vaccinated people and unvaccinated people.”
He went on to say that, “I will not accept or consent to a “Vaccine passport”/digital passport, nor will I use a Qr code/track and trace system that allows this system to be implemented. This allows for total government control over the citizens of Ireland and akins us to cattle.”
Here is Niall’s email in full.
Good morning gentlemen,
Firstly I would like to apologise for not making last nights zoom call. I had fallen asleep after work, due to being at a protest for the majority of Wednesday night(July 14th 2021) in our nations capital.
We live in exceptional times.
I will take this opportunity to make you aware that I am immediately resigning from the Senior Men’s, Irish National Ice Hockey Team. If you bare with me, I will explain in detail as to why.
Let me start by stating this is in no way an attack on the Irish Ice Hockey Association, our managers or coaches for the countless hours they put into this squad and organising trips abroad, along with the tireless work of attempting to open an ice rink in the Republic of Ireland.
Instead this is directly attributed to the recent bill passed in the Irish government on Wednesday night/Thursday morning. I have attached the PDF, should you be inclined to browse it.
Ireland is now, officially, a Medical apartheid/Fascist State in line with the wider global control grid. The group of people acting as the Irish Government has been allowed, by our citizens, Gardaí and the Irish defence forces to erode our rights given to us under the Irish constitution, the UN declaration of human rights and have broken the Nuremberg code. Our inalienable rights have also been eroded over the past 16 months, which are given to us by God, not government. (which is still recognised as the highest authority whether you believe in God or not) (I have attached links below to these rights)
I can no longer represent a country that has approved of the discrimination and segregation between vaccinated people and unvaccinated people. I will not be manipulated into taking a STILL experimental injection, with no licence, no long term safety or data, no legal liability for damages and only emergency use authorisation and zero proof of effectiveness/immunity. I will not risk my athletic abilities and normal functioning body. There are other well known and safe therapies available, like Ivermectin(peer reviewed/Nobel prize), which may be used before it comes to the need of any injection. I do not need to be a doctor to recognise this. The evidence is over whelming if you care to look.
I will not accept or consent to a “Vaccine passport”/digital passport, nor will I use a Qr code/track and trace system that allows this system to be implemented. This allows for total government control over the citizens of Ireland and akins us to cattle.
We now live in a two tier society.
As of July 15th 2021, my fiancée, my children, myself and many others became 2nd class citizens in Ireland. We can no longer do the same thing that 1st class citizens can do. We can no longer travel internationally without subjecting ourselves to medical intervention /testing(with a test not designed to detect illness) when we are not sick. (There are many studies showing that asymptomatic transmission is virtually non-existent).
The recent bill, gives the current ‘minister for health’ – Stephen Donnelly the power to decide what constitutes an indoor risk, including sports and leisure facilities (ice/Inline). He may decide on Monday it is a criminal offence to play indoor sport whereas on Tuesday it may be okay. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. These laws are unjust and thus giving me the right not to follow them. Unfortunately the police forces in Ireland have allowed and supported the government by refusing to protect the people of Ireland from draconian lawmakers. I can no long trust those sworn by oath to protect us.
Many of you have seen the recent images of France as people protest en mass in regards to president macrons recent address which will make entering supermarkets, schools and working illegal unless vaccinated. This is an EU country. If they can do it in France they will do it here. They previously did it in Nazi Germany.
Now at this point you must ask yourself, if this is such an effective treatment, why are they rewarding those who take it with their rights back and punishing those who refuse, many of whom, including myself are at little risk from this supposed disease and its supposed variants (reminder, vaccines protect me. Not you)?
At this time, I feel obliged to take a stand on the matter even if you believe its not a big deal. I must, morally position myself Inline with what is right and just, and I hope you can understand where I am coming from.
I hope that these laws will be reversed and that the criminals in government and the Gardaí who enforce such laws(and all covid restrictions) will be held accountable at some point in the future, as were those in the Nuremberg trials. (images attached for reference)
Until then, I once again state I will not represent a country who criminalises people who choose to live differently than the majority.
Hopefully in the near future I can tryout and rejoin this team that I have dedicated ALL of my adult life to, made life longs friends, which has also given me so much joy and happiness throughout the years.
I wanted to do this now instead of just before the upcoming development cup in October 2021, Germany, so that the coaches can fill the spot and train you guys, in your lines, in advance.
Ps* this is in no way a disregard to anyone who has been directly affected by an illness with the symptoms like the disease known as Covid-19. The government however has now directly impacted my children’s lives, unlike the illness, and I will not stand for this.
With all of my regards, Niall McEvoy Dundalk Republic of Ireland 16th July 2021
*I give full permission for this email to be circulated and used once it is not taken out of context(always given in full context) or rewritten in anyway*
Following the suspension of Hampshire GP Doctor Sam White by NHS England for publicly questioning Covid protocol, his solicitors Philip Hyland of PJH Law have sent the following letter to Sir Simon Stevens, Chief Executive Officer of NHS England.
The letter lays out accusations of unlawful actions by NHS executives, HM Government, SAGE, MHRA and other authorities.
The letter was also sent to Cressida Dick the Metropolitan Police chief, Charlie Massey the Chief Executive of the General Medical Council, Kathryn Stone OBE the Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards, and Lindsay Hoyle, Speaker of the House of Commons.
The accusations made within the letter to Sir Simon Stevens are damning and consist of the following –
The MHRA has failed to ensure the vaccine advertising programme meets common law obligations as well as statutory obligations.
The MHRA in granting emergency use authorisation for the Covid vaccine failed in their obligation to consider whether there are safe and effective medicines available as an alternative to vaccination.
The MHRA is failing in its obligations in failing either to instruct a bio-distribution study is conducted on those who have been vaccinated or in failing to publish the findings of such a bio-distribution study.
Clinicians practising within the NHS are obliged to do two things when administering a vaccine: 1. To do no harm. 2. To obtain the free and informed consent of those being vaccinated. The NHS and the Government have done neither and breach of these principles on free and informed consent is professional gross misconduct at an individual level.
At an organisational level if the NHS does not have clear evidence that every person being vaccinated has given free and informed consent it will render those holding executive office within the NHS as legally liable for those institutional failings.
Those presenting the information have not publicly declared at the press conferences their financial links to the vaccine industry.
Many of those presenting the information to the public are associated with or employed directly or indirectly by organisations who have been financially funded by the Gates Foundation.
The MHRA, the UK regulatory body approving the vaccines, has itself been funded by the Gates Foundation.
Moderna’s share price has risen from $10 to over $200 5 in the space of eighteen months. Bill Gates and his charitable foundation are significant investors in Moderna6 , one of the companies supplying a vaccine. It should also be noted that Bill Gates has a known association with Geoffrey Epstein.
Matt Hancock did not declare to the public that he had a girlfriend and he did not declare that that girlfriend had financial links through her business with PPE and other contracts over which he had responsibility.
The public have been informed via press conferences that there was only one medical route out of the pandemic and that was via vaccination. That route is not the only available route. Quicker, cheaper and less risky routes are also available as an alternative to those who have no need or desire to be vaccinated and these routes have been known about for many months.
The Government and the NHS has supplied information to the public on the number of infections. That information does not differentiate between individuals testing positive without a Doctor or nurse diagnosing that individual and confirming that they are infected and or are ill with covid, and those individuals testing positive where a Doctor or nurse has diagnosed infection in that individual and has diagnosed that they are ill with covid.
A letter from an MP states that the tests used can test for any Winter virus. It is probable therefore that the data presented by the government as infections with coronavirus also includes individuals who have tested positive but the test has failed to distinguish what sort of virus is present and whether that virus is old or recent.
The cycle threshold at which the PCR test has been set is too high to give reliable data on infection.
The press conferences have heightened the public’s sense of the material risk as the information presented exaggerated the numbers in a material way.
There has been no publicity at all at the press conferences that covid is not a High Consequence Infectious Disease.
The numbers of hospitalisations of people with covid has been presented to the public at the press conference and then disseminated via news broadcasts. That information has not differentiated between those presenting in hospital with covid illness. those presenting in hospital with another condition who have subsequently tested positive for coronavirus, or whether those hospitalised with coronavirus have caught the infection in hospital.
The information presented to the public has also not set out the numbers of people who have recovered from covid.
The information has been presented in such a way to make the public think that the material risks are greater than they are. This has either been intentional or grossly negligent.
The public are unable to give proper informed consent to vaccination if the material risks have been exaggerated or distorted.
The information presented to the public does not differentiate between those dying from Covid, those dying from another condition but who have tested positive within 28 days of death, or those dying from another condition but who have tested positive after death.
The public is unable to determine what their material risk is of dying from covid as the numbers of deaths from covid have been exaggerated and are unreliable.
The information that has been presented shows that the distribution of risk is uneven. Those under 75 who are healthy are unlikely to die from covid. The risk is asymmetrical. The vaccination roll out has been symmetrical.
The Prime Minister of the country in January 2021 described the vaccination roll out as an immunisation programme. That communication gave the public the impression that vaccines would provide immunity. The vaccine trials have been set up have as their trial design and trial protocol to reduce symptoms. The Prime Minister was at best sloppy with his language as the vaccine trial protocols was to test for efficacy of symptom reduction. It should also be noted that the vaccine protocols also refer to the use of PCR tests in the clinical trials, despite those tests’ known unreliability. None of the vaccines provide immunity. None of the vaccines stop transmission.
Initially the government said that only those identified as vulnerable should be vaccinated. That then changed. Mr Gates met with the PM before the change in policy, this meeting with Mr Gates was to discuss a global vaccine strategy. Initially the government said that children would not be vaccinated. That then changed. Initially government said restrictions would be released when 15 million people had been vaccinated, that then changed. Initially government said it had no plans for vaccination passports, that then changed.
The NHS has provided the Patient Information Leaflet to some patients who are being vaccinated. That Patient Information Leaflet does not present the material risks and the material benefits of the vaccination in an adequate way.
The Patient Information Leaflet does not make clear that the vaccines are still in clinical trial.
The Patient Information Leaflet does not make any reference to alternatives to vaccination.
The Patient Information Leaflet does not make clear that the mRNA vaccines are experimental in that these vaccines have never been used before and there is no data on medium term to long term safety. mRNA vaccines are described by the FDA as gene therapy.
The Patient Information Leaflet does not make clear that the clinical trials being run to show the safety and efficacy of the vaccine did not include particular cohorts of people including pregnant women and the very elderly. There is therefore no evidence available to show that they are safe and efficacious for those cohorts.
The Patient Information Leaflet does not make clear that the clinical trials are only using people who have not been infected with covid. There is therefore no data on safety and efficacy for vaccination of those who have been infected. Many people who have been infected with coronavirus are also being vaccinated.
. The Patient Information Leaflet does not set out the difference between the absolute risk and the relative risk from coronavirus infection.
By being vaccinated each individual is reducing their absolute risk of being infected and dying from covid by 1%.
The NHS allowed its logo on a series of adverts using celebrities to promote vaccination. It is also alleged that a number of celebrities have been paid to promote the vaccine via their social media.
None of the vaccines have received marketing authorisation from the MHRA. So there is a question mark as to whether an emergency use authorised vaccination should be advertised at all as there is very limited number of vaccines to choose from. Advertising of licensed medicines is strictly regulated. The Human Medicines Regulations 201227 make it a criminal offence for licensed medicines to be advertised by celebrities and any advert should notify the viewer what the active ingredient is in the vaccine if there is only one active ingredient. These adverts breach the law.
The NHS has taken no steps to distance itself from HM Government’s attempt to fetter every UK citizen’s right to decline any medical intervention.
The advertising campaign has placed pressure on people to have a vaccination. In the advertisement it is suggested that vaccination protects other members of a family including the elderly. However free and informed consent means that no one should be under any pressure from any family member to have a vaccination or indeed any medical treatment. The NHS website even states that in its section on informed consent.
The vaccination adverts give the impression that the vaccines have been licensed rather than the true position which is that they have been emergency use authorised which is a lower regulatory threshold than licensing.
The advertisements infer that the vaccines are safe. Safety is about risks. The adverts make no reference to the risk, however small, of serious adverse events.
SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection relies on the binding of S protein (Spike glycoprotein) to ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) 2 in the host cells. Vascular endothelium can be infected by SARS-CoV-2, which triggers mitochondrial reactive oxygen species production and glycolytic shift. Paradoxically, ACE2 is protective in the cardiovascular system, and SARS-CoV-1 S protein promotes lung injury by decreasing the level of ACE2 in the infected lungs. In the current study, we show that S protein alone can damage vascular endothelial cells (ECs) by downregulating ACE2 and consequently inhibiting mitochondrial function.
We administered a pseudovirus expressing S protein (Pseu-Spike) to Syrian hamsters intratracheally. Lung damage was apparent in animals receiving Pseu-Spike, revealed by thickening of the alveolar septa and increased infiltration of mononuclear cells. AMPK (AMP-activated protein kinase) phosphorylates ACE2 Ser-680, MDM2 (murine double minute 2) ubiquitinates ACE2 Lys-788, and crosstalk between AMPK and MDM2 determines the ACE2 level. In the damaged lungs, levels of pAMPK (phospho-AMPK), pACE2 (phospho-ACE2), and ACE2 decreased but those of MDM2 increased. Furthermore, complementary increased and decreased phosphorylation of eNOS (endothelial NO synthase) Thr-494 and Ser-1176 indicated impaired eNOS activity. These changes of pACE2, ACE2, MDM2 expression, and AMPK activity in endothelium were recapitulated by in vitro experiments using pulmonary arterial ECs infected with Pseu-Spike which was rescued by treatment with N-acetyl-L-cysteine, a reactive oxygen species inhibitor
Murder is an emotive word. In law, it requires premeditation. Death must be deemed to be unlawful. How could “murder” apply to failures of a pandemic response? Perhaps it can’t, and never will, but it is worth considering. When politicians and experts say that they are willing to allow tens of thousands of premature deaths for the sake of population immunity or in the hope of propping up the economy, is that not premeditated and reckless indifference to human life? If policy failures lead to recurrent and mistimed lockdowns, who is responsible for the resulting non-covid excess deaths? When politicians wilfully neglect scientific advice, international and historical experience, and their own alarming statistics and modelling because to act goes against their political strategy or ideology, is that lawful? Is inaction, action?1 How big an omission is not acting immediately after the World Health Organization declared a public health emergency of international concern on 30 January 2020?
At the very least, covid-19 might be classified as “social murder,” as recently explained by two professors of criminology.2 The philosopher Friedrich Engels coined the phrase when describing the political and social power held by the ruling elite over the working classes in 19th century England. His argument was that the conditions created by privileged classes inevitably led to premature and “unnatural” death among the poorest classes.3 In The Road to Wigan Pier, George Orwell echoed these themes in describing the life and living conditions of working class people in England’s industrial north.4 Today, “social murder” may describe the lack of political attention to social determinants and inequities that exacerbate the pandemic. Michael Marmot argues that as we emerge from covid-19 we must build back fairer.5
Coerced vaccination, no jab – no pay – no job, is not a thing of the future. The ‘vaccine hesitant’ are being sacked and it is happening now.
Barchester Healthcare Ltd employ a staff of approximately 17,000. Over several months they have conducted a campaign successfully to ‘persuade’ all their workforce to have a Covid-19 vaccine. They say about 90% have been vaccinated. They have written to the rest to say that, unless they can provide evidence of medical exemption, then their employment will be terminated.
Their campaign of persuasion has been nothing less than coercion. Barchester have offered a vaccine bonus for the vaccinated but for employees who do not agree to be vaccinated, they have repeatedly and expressly threatened.
The legal case
The law has not changed. The Human Rights Act is still in place, as is the legal requirement for informed consent.
Coerced injection of any substance is an interference with fundamental human rights that must be justified as necessary and proportionate. In circumstances where the government keeps repeating that the vaccines do not stop transmission and that the vulnerable have been vaccinated already, it is difficult to see any justification whatsoever.
Irrespective of your thoughts about these treatments – who may or may not benefit from any Covid vaccine, their efficacy, the adverse events, their experimental nature, unknown medium or long term harms or whether they should be regarded as unlawful because there is no longer an emergency – everyone still has the right to their personal and bodily autonomy.
Public Health England, on their 21 March 2020 update for High consequence infectious diseases (HCID), stated, “As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease in the UK.” If COVID-19 is not a high consequence infectious disease.
On the 11 May 2020 Downing Street Press Briefing, the UK’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty, confirmed:
“Most people will not get this virus at all. Of those who get symptoms, the vast majority will have a mild or moderate disease. The great majority of people, even in the highest risk groups, will not die.”
The European Medicines Agency is misleading citizens into medical experimentation, experts warn.
Doctors and scientists from 25 countries have today issued a rebuttal letter to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), following the regulator’s dismissal of their earlier warnings regarding COVID-19 vaccine dangers from clotting and bleeding.
Within days of the EMA receiving the group’s original letter on March 1st, outlining risks of blood disorders from COVID-19 vaccines, over a dozen countries suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine following deaths from clotting and bleeding, as the doctors had warned.
On March 23rd, however, the EMA dismissed the group’s concerns as relating to “minor” and “rare” events, concluding that “a positive benefit-risk balance has been established.”
The doctors and scientists have today hit back, accusing the EMA of misleading the public on the vaccines’ true risk-benefit profile. “Your reply of March 23 is unconvincing and unacceptable,” they wrote, noting that recorded cases of life-threatening cerebral venous thrombosis (CSVT) post-vaccination likely “represent just the tip of a huge iceberg”. Common reactions to vaccination, including headache, nausea, blurred vision and vomiting, they state, are symptoms of CSVT, and should be assessed as such, immediately.
Clotting and bleeding after vaccination can also “be expected to increase with each re-vaccination, and each intervening coronavirus exposure” the group warned. Over time “this renders both repeated vaccination and common coronaviruses dangerous to young and healthy age groups, for whom – in the absence of ‘vaccination’ – COVID-19 poses no substantive risk.
Hello. I am Reiner Fuellmich and I have been admitted to the Bar in Germany and in California for 26 years. I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, formerly one of the world’s largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world; VW, one of the world’s largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Kuehne and Nagel, the world’s largest shipping company. We’re suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case.
I’m also one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists’ and experts’ testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking. All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause.
This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a “Corona Scandal” and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages. On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas. And for this reason I will now explain to you how and where an international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever, the corona fraud scandal, which has meanwhile unfolded into probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed.