Does taking the pseudo-Vaccine make you
the Property of the Manufacturer?
I have recently received from several sources a document claiming that judgements in the Supreme Court of the USA regarding the patenting of human cellular DNA makes anyone who has received the "Covid-19 vaccine" cease to be a human being, is automatically reclassified as "trans-human" and becomes the property of the "vaccine" manufacturer.
It is, further, claimed that this judgement is applicable world-wide and cannot be challenged in any other court.
The above document concerns two judgements of the Supreme Court in 2012 and 2013 in which the company "Myraid Genetics Incorporated" claimed that:-
a) Discovering the precise location of genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 which are believed (falsely) to indicate susceptibility to breast cancer and
Myraid then developed BRCA cDNA as a test to determine whether the BRCA1 or BRCA2 are mutated in a way which increases the likelihood of breast cancer.
- gives them a right to patent BRCA1, BRCA2 and BRCA cDNA.
The court ruled that as BRCA1 and BRCA2 are natural and that Myraid had merely discovered their location does not grant to Myraid any right to patent them. The court then proceeded to rule that as BRCA cDNA is a new substance, not present in nature, created by Myraid that Myraid holds a valid patent claim upon it.
There is no mention in either judgement of transhumanism nor whether modifying human genes could imply ownership of those modified genes.
This said, one can see in these two judgements the possibility that such a claim could be made but there are many more obstacles which would have to be overcome before taking any sort of gene "therapy", even if sold under a false claim that it is a "vaccine" against a non-existent disease, could change your status from human being to the personal property of the gene-therapy manufacturer even though the "therapy" alters all of your genes in the way judgement was given for Myraid relating to BRCA cDNA.
The first such obstacle would be the defining of "human being" and "trans-human" neither of which has any clear meaning other than "men" (which includes women) in the preamble to the US constitution. Trans-human has, to date, not been considered by the courts and has, therefore, no legal meaning.
Such a claim would fall foul of article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This is based upon judgements in the Nürnberg War Crimes Tribunal against Nazi doctors who carried out experiments upon prisoners in the concentration camps, seven of whom were hanged for their crimes. Article 7 specifies that no medical procedure may be carried out without the informed consent of the "patient". Clearly, misleading the "patient" that a gene-altering concoction is a vaccine against a non-existent disease is a "Crime against Humanity" as enshrined in article 7.
Any company claiming in the above manner to be owner of the victims of their subterfuge opens themselves to criminal prosecution against which the Supreme Court is disbarred from granting them immunity.
In short, the claims which have been reported to me must be classified as extremely far fetched and almost certainly without any merit.
More useful information is to be found here
as well as in the archive (link at top of page)
Why is Homoeopathy so effective?
The reader may be excused if his/her reaction to the above question is, "But they've proved that it doesn't work at all." The truth is, of course, that "they" haven't done anything of the sort. What "they" have done is to refuse to test it properly and then claim that this refusal proves something about homoeopathy.
"They", of course, is the pharmaceutical cartel.
Why are they so against homoeopathy that they spend millions every year trying to suppress it? The answer to this question becomes obvious when we look at how and why homoeopathy was developed.
At the end of the 18th century, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann was beset with a serious problem, as were many of his medical colleagues. The problem was that of pharmaceutical medications which often cured the sickness but then went on to kill the patient. They still do this, by the way; pharmaceutical medication is one of the three biggest killers throughout the First World. When we take into consideration that most cancer deaths are caused by such treatments, then the pharmaceutical industry takes the number one place as the leading cause of death and serious injury.
Dr. Hahnemann closed his practise and spent the next several years attempting to resolve this problem. What he, eventually, discovered is that there are two parts to a pharmaceutical preparation: One is the active ingredient which cures the sickness and the other is the chemical carrier which is often so toxic that it kills the patient. Dr. Hahnemann then went on to discover how to administer the effective part without using any toxic chemicals. Thus was homoeopathy born. A great leap forwards, wouldn't you think?
The "fly in the ointment" (literally) is that the pharmaceutical industry began life as a branch of the agricultural and explosive chemicals industry; their business is selling chemicals, not effective health care treatments. Selling effective treatments without their chemicals means little to no profit for them. This is the source of their antipathy towards homoeopathy - less profit!
Although Dr. Hahnemann's discoveries and those of his many successors were initially empirical, i.e. "It works so we'll keep using it," since the 1990's, quantum biophysics has proved the science behind homoeopathy (whilst, at the same time, proving pharmaceutical medicine to be completely unscientific).
A human being is not, contrary to the claims of the pharmaceutical industry, a random assortment of hundreds of chemicals which all have to be kept in order. A human being is a centre of natural creative information which is purpose built to self-order. When the natural balance, for whatever reason, falters, the correct and effective help is to strengthen the informational structures so that the human system regains its own balance. Adding extra chemicals which are not naturally found in the human body, is both superfluous and contra-productive.
Samuel Hahnemann and his many successors have found ways to insert corrective impulses into the informational structure so that the human being will naturally self-correct. This makes pharmaceutical preparations almost completely superfluous.
Now do you understand why the pharmaceutical industry fights tooth and nail to prevent you getting it?
So, finally, what is their "proof" that homoeopathy doesn't work?
Quite simple really: Their propaganda (marketing) states that adding chemicals is necessary to correct problems within the human body and / or mind. If those chemicals are not present then there can be no effect. This tail biting nonsense is their justification for refusing to conduct any sort of examination of homoeopathy - "our hypothesis states that there is nothing there to test and so we won't test it".
Instead of following the standard usage instructions for homoeopathy and observing the results, an irrelevant claim is used to evade the issue and no actual investigation is ever carried out; a level of dishonesty we have all come to expect from the pharmaceutical industry and their plethora of pre-purchased "experts", government advisors and politicians.
The process used is to "ask" their "independent" experts to look into homoeopathy (and many, many other healing methods such as ivermectin, HCQ, etc., etc.) without going so far as to actually test them; rather, they are to work from instructions which declare that there is nothing there to test. For this non-study, they are handsomely "remunerated". Their results are then passed on to government advisors who either receive stipends from the pharmaceutical industry or have significant shareholdings therein. These then "advise" government ministers who, themselves, have personal financial involvement in pharmaceuticals and homoeopathy is de-funded.
This is how the pharmaceutical industry controls any and all access to healing methods which have a long-proven track record of effectiveness whilst being vastly cheaper than pharmaceuticals.
It's not about health and safety but about pharmaceutical profits!