A reader, whom we have given the name A.L.R., writes to give us his view on the errors the “medical freedom movement” is making and points out six mistakes he believes are being made.
Please note: The points and views expressed are entirely those of A.L.R. and do not reflect the views of The Exposé.
To The Exposé,
The ‘Medical-Freedom Movement’ Could Get Us Killed!
To you leaders of the so-called ‘medical-freedom movement’—
Whose side are you on, really? Your lazy thinking and wilful ignorance have cost untold numbers of lives. You repeat the same old strategies and tired old phrases that merely trim the weeds of medical tyranny while allowing its poisonous root to spread. Your errors could get us all killed.
Your most dangerous mistake is to base opposition to forced medicine not on the solid ground that it is eternally unlawful, but on the shifting sands of data and statistics.
You say things, like “This disease, or that variant, is too mild to warrant this or that measure.” Or “The measure is not safe enough or not effective enough to be mandated.”
Utter, utter fools. What you are saying is that you’d be absolutely fine with forced medicine if only the outbreak were serious enough, or if the enforced measure were safe enough, or effective enough, or no longer experimental.
If rights are expendable depending on conditions on the ground, or depending on statistics that so-called experts tell you, then they’re not rights at all; they’re flimsy conveniences.
Forced medicine is eternally unlawful yesterday, today, and forever. And no emergency, whether a real emergency or a perceived emergency or an invented emergency, removes one single medical right or any other type of right.
Even if there were a plague on the scale of the Black Death that wiped out half the population, and even if there were some medical intervention proven to be 100% safe and 100% effective, no-one ever, under any circumstances, would have authority to impose it.
And here’s your second biggest mistake, that you never defend medical confidentiality. The Hippocratic Oath doesn’t just say, “First do no harm” and “I will administer no deadly medicine.” It also says, “I will not divulge.” And that principle of confidentiality is enshrined in international law and supported by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Yet you’re absolutely fine with the government, or an employer, or a travel company knowing your medical status or your vaccination status. It’s none of their goddamn business. No-one has to divulge their medical status, and if you’re not divulging your medical status, how can anyone discriminate against you on the basis of it?
Also, if they don’t know your medical status, there’s no need to apply for a religious exemption or a medical exemption. The word, “No,” is exemption enough. The word, “No,” always has been, and always will be, exemption enough.
I’m telling you to be a constitutional extremist, a constitutional absolutist. Anything less, and you’re dead!
Here’s your third mistake, you are forgetting to tell people that, under international law and medical codes, you have the right to refuse not just masks, not just injections, you also have the right to refuse the tests. If you had told people that before they went into the charnel houses that hospitals have become, how many more could have been saved?
Armed with this information, patients would refuse the supposed COVID tests that have been channeling them into corridors of death and the hospital protocols designed to kill. But you didn’t tell them that, did you? And you’re still not telling them. How many lives have been lost through your ignorance?
Fourth mistake. Lawyers staying inside your little legislative boxes, whinging that you can’t go after Big Pharma or doctors or politicians or bureaucrats because they have ‘legal immunity’. Do you not realize that all the Acts and statutes that confer this supposed ‘legal immunity’ are nothing more than contracts that only one party has agreed to and only one party has signed?!
You and I, we the People, were never consulted about these contracts, did not write these contracts, did not read these contracts, and certainly did not sign these contracts. Yet you lawyers are taking them as gospel. As Martin Luther King wrote, “An unjust law is no law at all.” And why, lawyers, instead of drawing on international law, are you shrinking into the bubble of evil U.S. legislation that provides cover for tyranny and injustice?
Fifth mistake. Expecting any salvation from a political party or a political candidate, such as Ron DeSantis because he’s thrown you a few bones, while you overlook two state statues he has signed that glaringly promote medical tyranny.
Remember the duty conferred on us by the Declaration of Independence. It tells us to abolish any form of government that is destructive of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. And that includes a form of government that offers a political duopoly where both sides are united in trying to destroy us.
Sixth mistake. You keep citing the Nuremberg Code, which applies to experimental medicine, while overlooking all the other international laws and medical codes that apply to all medicine, whether experimental or not. Where are you going to go when the authorities, the powers that shouldn’t be, say, “It’s no longer experimental because we’ve fully approved it. So Nuremberg doesn’t apply any more.” Where are you going to go?
Finally, you’re using the enemy’s definitions of words, such as what ‘pandemic’ means or what ‘vaccine’ means.
So here’s an example that includes most, if not all, of the above mistakes. In January 2023, Children’s Health Defense rejoiced that the New York State Supreme Court ruled against the state’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. So far, so good. But…
The judge didn’t overturn the mandate because it was inherently unlawful, which it is, he did it because it came from an executive order and was not voted on by the legislature. Meaning what? That if the governor can’t be a sole tyrant, the legislature can? Does a mandate become valid if only it follows the prescribed procedure?
The court also decided that the mandate was “arbitrary and capricious” on the basis that the “vaccines” do not stop transmission of the “virus”! Meaning what? That if another medical product is conjured that they say does stop transmission, you’d be fine with forcing it on people?
The lawyer for Children’s Health Defense said if the mandate “can’t stop the spread of COVID, then it’s just arbitrary and irrational.” Meaning you agree that if a product could stop the spread of a disease, then forcing it suddenly would become rational? Is this what they taught you in law school?
Oh, and she talked about the mandate caused a staffing shortage in New York hospitals. Why are you making all these peripheral arguments that don’t address the core tyranny? You are leaving the door open for future tyranny!
Afterwards, Mary Holland, President of Children’s Health Defense said, “We are thrilled by this critical win against a COVID vaccine mandate, correctly finding that any such mandate at this stage, given current knowledge, is arbitrary.”
What is she thinking? “At this stage”? “Given current knowledge”? No! The mandate is arbitrary, period, end of story, eternally, in every circumstance, at every stage and whatever the current levels of knowledge or ignorance.
Holland’s statement echoes another hollow slogan we’ve heard in ‘medical-freedom’ circles. “Where there is risk, there must be choice.” Again, you’re conceding a false authority to remove choice by claiming there is no risk.
The Children’s Health Defense lawyer also complained that the mandate didn’t have a religious exemption. Meaning what? That you’d be fine with forcing it on people who don’t claim to follow a religion?
My friends. This is a hollow, hollow victory, because you didn’t address the core desecrations at work. Again, I say, be a constitutional extremist. You cannot mandate medicine of any kind, at any time, or in any circumstances.
So before you get more people killed, understand and uphold…
- All medical coercion is outlawed eternally, whatever the circumstances.
- Medical confidentiality is eternally sacred.
- The word “No” is exemption enough.
- Refuse the tests!
- Bring justice, regardless of acts and statutes, and stop bending the knee to unlawful legislation.
Without all these, all you’re doing is nibbling around the edges of medical tyranny but never striking at the root. And that, as I’ve said, could get us all killed!
If you would like to publish a letter, please email it to email@example.com addressed “Letter to the Editor.” At the end of your email, please indicate the name or pseudonym you would like shown when we publish your letter.