Whether you have gotten the jab or not, Paul S. Gardiner at American Thinker is not the first to
point out that the mRNA experimental gene therapy is not a “vaccine.” That is a distinction that was made early on in the “plandemic.” But Mr. Gardiner is proposing a
potential legal remedy that citizens might demand.
While IMHO it is a long shot, I am sharing it anyway:
. . . Why call an experimental gene
therapy product a "vaccine"? Dr. [David] Martin believes
that there are two basic reasons: 1) to circumvent liability for damages, and
2) if the products were called gene therapy or a similar label, most people
would wisely refuse to use them.
Regarding avoiding liability for
damages, as long as the U.S. is under a state of emergency, things like
COVID-19 "vaccines" are allowed under emergency use
authorization. As long as the emergency use authorization is in
effect, the makers of these "vaccines" are not financially liable for
any damages that comes from their use. However, Dr Martin states
that "there is no liability shield for a medical emergency countermeasure
that is gene therapy." In fact, if the documentation Pfizer and
Moderna provided the Federal Drug Administration for emergency use
authorization can be proven fraudulent, then there is no legal protection.
Given the above, a multitude of
multi-million-dollar lawsuits are possible, if not probable, against the two
pharmaceutical companies by parties who have been "injured" in one
way or another by Moderna and Pfizer inoculations. Depending on the
evidence produced, criminal indictments may also be a possibility.
What needs to happen
next? Dr. Martin urges citizens to contact their state attorney,
governor, representatives, and anyone else who might be in a position to take
action to address and correct what he calls a tremendous fraud on the American
people. . . .
Full column is here. Obviously, legal recourse is not the same as a medical remedy, but for what it is worth, calling governors, state reps, et al might get some media attention.
# # #
