The Nuremberg Code, When Human Rights Still Matter

When Governments around the world are mandating their citizens to get injected as a condition to participate in society, can it be a breach to International Law?

The world has been experiencing a “pandemic” and the only proposed solution has been an experimental injection wrongly designated as a “vaccine”. Natural immunity disappeared according to all government officials, but according to real Doctors, natural immunity was found to be highly effective, many times more effective in fact than any chemical acquired immunity!

Since the “vaccine” is still at the experimental phase, the Nuremberg Code does apply and should be enforced.

What is the Nuremberg Code?

The Nuremberg Code was created after the Second World War’s Nuremberg trial.

The trial brought to light such atrocities committed against humanity, that people of the time created the Nuremberg Code which traced the line of conduct for medical experiments, in order to prevent any such reprehensible conduct from ever occurring again.

They prosecuted the people who participated in this crime against humanity, from the doctors, nurses to journalists, scientists and politicians, while many fled the country before being on trial, many were sentenced to life in prison or hanged. Just following orders was not considered as a defense.

New mRNA Technology

These new “vaccines” have nothing to do with the traditional techniques used to produce them. We are faced with a new untested technology, described as an operating system which takes over the immune system by altering the DNA.

Raising Questions

When one reads the Nuremberg Code below, many questions arise. This is one of the reasons why I wrote about the Nuremberg Code breaches in a letter I sent to Prime Minister Trudeau in April 2021. I extracted a few of the questions from the letter and posted them below.

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, 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.

When I ask the people around me about this injection, not all seem to fully comprehend the implications of the mRNA gene alteration process.

They now say that the third dose does not protect the people but rather propagates a new disease they named Omicron. They are now talking about repeating this inefficient process every year.

“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.”

A study published on PubMed in March 2021 found that the consent to the present experiment was insufficient to get the required informed consent: “This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.”

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.

There are thousands of adverse effects which have been occurring around the world in the past year, concording with the deployment of the “vaccine” campaigns or the mass experiment on the world.

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.

Documents demonstrated that no animal experimentation had been conclusive prior to injecting humans with these experimental injections.

The knowledge of the natural history of the disease and other problems under study, were still unknown because they called it a novel coronavirus so people can fear this unknown (in fact, it was just the latest version), therefore, the results couldn’t be anticipated to justify this largescale experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

We have heard of people suffering severe side-effects, some temporary, others seemingly permanent, and hundreds of thousands have also died around the world following one to three injections.

We are seeing healthy people getting the injection, and still being infected with the SARS-CoV2, it is clear now tht the experiment is not stopping the spread whatsoever.

The coercion by governments and media does affect the mental health of the population, it divided those who want to be “vaccinated” an those who do not, which is immoral and criminal coming from any organization.

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.

We have already seen the results in other countries, after receiving these experimental injections, some people started developing the SARS-CoV-2 variants, or even died.

Funny fact: When there is salmonella found in food, we witness a massive recall of the infected products, and it is announced all over the news, when it is “vaccine” injuries, crickets…

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.

In some regions, the variants seem to appear not long after the beginning of mass vaccination campaigns.

Now it seems like the level of risks taken with this medical experimentation, exceeds the 0.2% deathrate amongst the people infected with SARS-CoV-2. Statistics show, that each year, many vulnerable people unfortunately die from flu-like diseases, even though, most of them received a flu shot, supposed to protect them from the flu.

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

This clause mentions the need for adequate facilities which should be provided to protect the experimental subjects against even remote possibilities of injury.

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 seemed to him to be impossible.

The Nuremberg Code specifies that the subjects should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, meaning that everybody has free choice to even want to start the process in the first place. Therefore, mandating these experimental “vaccines” by governments breaches this clause.

This clause in itself renders the governments’ position and approach with their “vaccine” mandates, unlawful. Nobody can force anyone into a medical experiment, period.

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 judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

At the moment, it seems like there is no limit to the acceptable number of adverse effects, whether they are light, severe or worse, death follows. Athletes are dropping like flies with heart failures at an unprecedented rate and mainstream media is silent again, purposely avoiding to link these new health issues with the new experimental drug because they are sponsored by the “vaccine” industry.

After two years into this “plandemic”, we now know that the SARS-CoV-2 has a survival rate of 99.8%; that this health crisis was intentionally induced; since cures do exist, therefore, the “vaccination” campaigns are no more justified; since experimental “vaccines” are not required to survive this “plandemic, neither are health and/or ID passes. Nobody has to be watched at all times, because the right to privacy does exist also and must be enforced, not eliminated, like some unelected international organizations would wish for, to instaure their totalitarian new world order, the Elites’ disdain for humanity.

Nuremberg 2.0

In Germany, Dr. Fuëllmich launched the Nuremberg 2.0 trial in July 2021, at the International Criminal Court (ICC), regarding the unlawful “vaccine” mandates and the “plandemic” narrative. This trial is ongoing and almost over, its verdict should be known soon.

The Nuremberg Code proves, more than ever in history, that Human Rights do matter, even if some disagree, it is Inconveniently TRUE.

Covid vs Human Rights – Court Cases

Sources