Tag: consent

‘Snooping Around’: Government Officials Under Fire for Bypassing State Constitution

‘It makes it very dangerous when you’re hunting with rifles and people aren’t wearing colors that make them easy to see.’

A court is being asked to act against state officials who bypass the requirements of their own state constitution.

The situation is that while the Alabama Constitution “makes it clear that if the government wants to come searching on your property, they need a warrant based on probable cause,” agents from the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources simply cite a statute to ignore that requirement.

The Institute for Justice now is working with three Alabama residents to sue over the practice that has agents invading and searching private property not only without a warrant, but without consent.

The plaintiffs are Killen residents Dalton Boley and Regina Williams and Muscle Shoals resident Dale Liles, who all took action after facing “multiple” privacy intrusions by game wardens.

None ever has been charged with hunting violations, “yet game wardens have snooped around on their properties without warrants on multiple occasions. That’s because of an Alabama statute that allows game wardens to ‘enter upon any land … in the performance of their duty.’ Whether it’s a posted field or residential yard, the statute gives wardens broad power to roam around private property without any warrant,” the IJ said.

But, IJ lawyer Suranjan Sen explained, “The Alabama Constitution makes it clear that if the government wants to come searching on your property, they need a warrant based on probable cause, and game wardens are not exempt from the Constitution.”

Williams owns 10 acres in Killen and had used it for decades, but as she aged she gave her neighbor, Boley, and his family permission to use it.

Then the game wardens arrived.

Keep reading

You Want To Vaccinate My Child? Just Sign This Form

I have yet to meet a Physician that will sign this form now downloaded by hundreds of parents. The reason they won’t sign is two-fold: First, they do not want to place themselves in a vulnerable position of being negligent for not providing informed consent to thousands of other parents; and second, many of them realize after their own extensive research that the risks far outweigh any benefits when it comes to vaccination.

It’s been over a year since hundreds of parents have downloaded this form and there are still no reports of any signatures. Many physicians won’t even look at the form while they dismiss a parent’s anti-vaccination stance as ridiculous. The behavior is a clear indication of a very misinformed Physician who does not have his or her patient’s best interests at heart. They are not willing to inform their patients of the risks, only the benefits they feel are acceptable. They are not open-minded to any other side of the debate except their own bias view passed down through the medical system.

Then are those Physicians who have questioned the vaccination schedules and will pursue their own research. Many of them are now awakening themselves thanks to ongoing research and pressure from parents and even other colleagues to look at other perspectives besides their own indoctrination. If you are pressured by any Physician to vaccinate, please download and print this form (and send us a Physician signed copy if possible). Assertively state to your Doctor that it is the only way you will be fully informed to consider vaccination and that an analysis of the risks and benefits will better allow you to evaluate the decision.

100% of Physicians approached with this form have so far declined to sign it.

Keep reading

North Carolina family can sue over COVID-19 vaccine administered without consent, court rules

A North Carolina mother and her son can sue a public school system and a doctors’ group for allegedly giving the boy a COVID-19 vaccine without consent, the state Supreme Court ruled.

The ruling handed down Friday reverses a lower-court decision that a federal health emergency law prevented Emily Happel and her son Tanner Smith from filing a lawsuit.

Both a trial judge and the state Court of Appeals had ruled against the two, who sought litigation after Smith received an unwanted vaccine during the height of the coronavirus pandemic.

Smith was vaccinated in August 2021 at age 14 despite his opposition at a testing and vaccination clinic at a Guilford County high school, according to the family’s lawsuit.

Keep reading

The Compromised FDA Knows Exactly What It’s Doing

The sneaky bastards at the FDA did this a year ago, right under our noses. In January 2024, the FDA finalized a rule permitting Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to waive or even alter informed consent requirements for clinical investigations deemed “minimal risk.” TTR guest author Jon Fleetwood, as always, brings us this news in his excellent reporting. Read his entire article here.

IRBs. Informed Consent. What does it all mean? If you don’t do research, you likely won’t know.

What is an IRB?

An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a panel of individuals who review and oversee research studies that involve human participants. The IRB ensures that the studies are ethical and that they comply with all regulations. The IRB’s primary function is to protect the rights and welfare of the human research participants, making sure they are treated fairly, ethically and safely.

Anyone doing research must have an IRB, and that not only applies to direct human research (meaning the human is actually being given a drug or using a device), but also for indirect studies where the patient isn’t “touched” so to speak or actively involved. A direct example would be a clinical trial where a new drug is being tested. The human participants actually enroll in the trial and are given test doses of the medication. Even if a human participant is given a placebo, that research must be covered by an IRB to ensure the patients’ physical and psychological well-being. An example of an indirect study is one in which a company or other research entity is just using data from patients, with no direct patient interaction. In some cases an IRB is still needed to use data that may potentially identify who the subjects are.

The bottom line is that an IRB is needed for any drug, device assessment, survey or other study. And this is what makes the FDA’s ruling so unbelievable. Fleetwood says the implications are staggering, and he is absolutely right:

“Under this waiver, any person’s health data, biospecimens (such as blood or tissue samples), or medical records can be accessed and used for FDA-regulated research if it meets vague and highly subjective criteria.”

Keep reading

Iraq lowers age of consent to just 9 years old in sick new law so old men can marry children

Iraq has passed a law that would legalise the marriage of children as young as nine.

Three divisive laws have now been passed which give Islamic courts increased authority over family matters, including marriage, divorce and inheritance. Activists argue that this undermines Iraq’s 1959 Personal Status Law, which unified family law and established safeguards for women.

Iraqi law currently sets 18 as the minimum age of marriage in most cases. The changes passed Tuesday would let clerics rule according to their interpretation of Islamic law, which some interpret to allow marriage of girls in their early teens – or as young as 9 under the Jaafari school of Islamic law followed by many Shiite religious authorities in Iraq.

Proponents of the changes defend them as a means to align the law with Islamic principles and reduce Western influence on Iraqi culture.

The parliament also passed a general amnesty law seen as benefiting Sunni detainees and that’s also seen as giving a pass to people involved in corruption and embezzlement. The chamber also passed a land restitution law aimed at addressing Kurdish territorial claims.

Intisar al-Mayali, a human rights activist and a member of the Iraqi Women’s League, said passage of the civil status law amendments “will leave disastrous effects on the rights of women and girls, through the marriage of girls at an early age, which violates their right to life as children, and will disrupt the protection mechanisms for divorce, custody and inheritance for women.” The session ended in chaos and accusations of procedural violations.

“Half of the lawmakers present in the session did not vote, which broke the legal quorum,” a parliamentary official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly. He said that some members protested loudly and others climbed onto the parliamentary podium.

After the session, a number of legislators complained about the voting process, under which all three controversial laws – each of which was supported by different blocs – were voted on together.

Keep reading

Drones Spray ‘Self-Spreading’ COVID-19 Vaccine for ‘Large-Area Inoculation of Humans’ in ‘DEFUSE’ EcoHealth/DARPA Project

  • EcoHealth’s DEFUSE Proposal Exposed: In 2018, EcoHealth Alliance submitted a proposal to DARPA, codenamed DEFUSE, outlining plans to deploy aerosolized immune modulators, chimeric spike proteins, and/or self-spreading vaccines via drones, potentially over humans.
  • Aerosolized Vaccination on Humans: DEFUSE documents explicitly describe large-area aerosol delivery systems for “inoculation of animals/humans,” raising the question of whether these plans were executed on unsuspecting populations.
  • Drone Deployment and Pandemic Origin: The DEFUSE proposal and DARPA’s advanced drone programs suggest a chilling possibility: that drones may have played a role in the COVID-19 pandemic, challenging the mainstream lab-leak narrative.
  • DARPA’s Connection to Moderna: By 2012, DARPA was already working with Moderna on RNA-based spike protein vaccines. A 2016 Moderna patent contains a genetic sequence with a one-in-3-trillion match to the pandemic virus, igniting claims of bioengineering origins.
  • Suppression of DEFUSE Details: Whistleblower revelations show attempts by DARPA and intelligence agencies to classify and censor DEFUSE-related research. U.S. senators have demanded investigations into these actions.
  • Self-Spreading Vaccines and Gain-of-Function: DEFUSE documents reveal plans for self-disseminating vaccines and host-to-host therapeutic distribution, indicating the potential use of engineered viruses as vaccine delivery systems.
  • Unprecedented Drone Funding Surge: A 26% spike in military drone funding in 2019 aligns with DEFUSE’s timeline and its drone-based aerosol delivery technologies, hinting at pre-pandemic preparations.
  • International Drone Use During COVID-19: Governments worldwide deployed drones for “disinfecting,” but studies debunk the effectiveness of this practice, raising suspicion about the true purpose of these operations.
  • A Coordinated Bioengineering Agenda?: The alignment of DEFUSE, DARPA, and drone advancements reveals an unsettling intersection of gain-of-function research, bioweaponized delivery systems, and self-spreading vaccines.
  • Urgent Transparency Needed: The DEFUSE project raises alarming questions about the origins of COVID-19, the ethics of aerosolized bioengineering, and the U.S. government’s role in these developments. The public deserves truth and accountability, especially considering a potentially incoming bird flu pandemic.

Keep reading

Apple auto-opts everyone into having their photos analyzed by AI for landmarks

Apple last year deployed a mechanism for identifying landmarks and places of interest in images stored in the Photos application on its customers iOS and macOS devices and enabled it by default, seemingly without explicit consent.

Apple customers have only just begun to notice.

The feature, known as Enhanced Visual Search, was called out last week by software developer Jeff Johnson, who expressed concern in two write-ups about Apple’s failure to explain the technology, which is believed to have arrived with iOS 18.1 and macOS 15.1 on October 28, 2024.

In a policy document dated November 18, 2024 (not indexed by the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine until December 28, 2024, the date of Johnson’s initial article), Apple describes the feature thus:

Enhanced Visual Search in Photos allows you to search for photos using landmarks or points of interest. Your device privately matches places in your photos to a global index Apple maintains on our servers. We apply homomorphic encryption and differential privacy, and use an OHTTP relay that hides [your] IP address. This prevents Apple from learning about the information in your photos. You can turn off Enhanced Visual Search at any time on your iOS or iPadOS device by going to Settings > Apps > Photos. On Mac, open Photos and go to Settings > General.

Apple did explain the technology in a technical paper published on October 24, 2024, around the time that Enhanced Visual Search is believed to have debuted. A local machine-learning model analyzes photos to look for a “region of interest” that may depict a landmark. If the AI model finds a likely match, it calculates a vector embedding – an array of numbers – representing that portion of the image.

The device then uses homomorphic encryption to scramble the embedding in such a way that it can be run through carefully designed algorithms that produce an equally encrypted output. The goal here being that the encrypted data can be sent to a remote system to analyze without whoever is operating that system from knowing the contents of that data; they just have the ability to perform computations on it, the result of which remain encrypted. The input and output are end-to-end encrypted, and not decrypted during the mathematical operations, or so it’s claimed.

The dimension and precision of the embedding is adjusted to reduce the high computational demands for this homomorphic encryption (presumably at the cost of labeling accuracy) “to meet the latency and cost requirements of large-scale production services.” That is to say Apple wants to minimize its cloud compute cost and mobile device resource usage for this free feature.

With some server optimization metadata and the help of Apple’s private nearest neighbor search (PNNS), the relevant Apple server shard receives a homomorphically-encrypted embedding from the device, and performs the aforementioned encrypted computations on that data to find a landmark match from a database and return the result to the client device without providing identifying information to Apple nor its OHTTP partner Cloudflare.

Keep reading

Vaccine by Cop

Heads up New Zealand

Every person alive right now PAY ATTENTION

New laws going in that involve those in charge of civil authority having the ability to use their position, and force for assistance to the chief medical officer of health. THE POLICE

  • for quarantine
  • for assistance with the medical treatment the medical officer of health prescribes

Section 71A

states that a member of the police may do anything reasonably necessary (including the use of force) to help a medical officer of health or any person authorised by the medical officer of health in the exercise or performance of powers or functions under sections 70 or 71.

section 70(1)(f)

The power to detain, isolate or quarantine allows a medical officer of health to ‘require persons, places, buildings, ships, vehicles, aircraft, animals, or things to be isolated, quarantined, or disinfected’ 

thus a medical officer can suddenly detain, isolate or quarantine you.

section 70(1)(h)

The power to prescribe preventive treatment allows a medical officer of health, in respect of any person who has been isolated or quarantined, to require people to remain where they are isolated or quarantined until they have been medically examined and found to be free from infectious disease, AND UNTIL THEY HAVE UNDERGONE SUCH PREVENTATIVE TREATMENT AS THE MEDICAL OFFICE OF HEALTH PRESCRIBES

(va÷÷ine) Va÷÷ine by cop.

This get invoked is easy-

Page 125 of the Pandemic Plan-

“Special powers are authorised

  • by the Minister of Health or
  • by an epidemic notice or
  • apply where an emergency has been declared under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002.”

So lots of ways.

Keep reading

No Means No: The Child in Vermont Said No, So What Good is the Vermont Supreme Court Ruling?

During the height of the COVID19 pandemic debacle, suggestive reasoning in advocating for Federal vaccine mandates was used to nudge the unthinkable. This observation is directed at a 2022 article by Fraser and Neuss in the journal Chest. At a time when it was already known that the vaccines failed to prevent transmission, the authors nevertheless attempted to nudge subtly toward a nationalized approach to vaccine mandates without explicitly stating this position. Their approach is easily criticized for its passive-aggressive tone, lack of clarity, and failure to fully engage with counterarguments.

I will argue that via a detailed analysis of the principle of informed consent. I will argue that solicited, explicit, and voluntary agreement before administering medical procedures, particularly vaccinations, without pretext, coercion or presumption, is a basic human right. The Vermont Supreme Court’s recent ruling, interpreted by some as allowing schools to vaccinate children without explicit parental consent, is highlighted as an anomalous but significant threat to informed consent and parental rights. In particular, in addition to rights to choose (accept or decline) proferred medical options, this ruling potentially enables the state to enroll children in long-term vaccine safety studies without parental knowledge or consent, contravening ethical standards outlined in 45 CFR 46, the Common Rule, and other federal regulations designed to protect vulnerable populations.

Case examples, such as Murthy v. Missouri (2024) and Medical Professionals for Informed Consent v. Bassett (2023), are used to illustrate the importance of maintaining individual rights and informed consent in public health policies. These cases underscore the necessity for clear legislative frameworks and robust protections to prevent overreach and maintain public trust.

I call for more direct and transparent discussions on vaccine mandates, urging a balanced approach that respects individual autonomy and informed consent while addressing public health needs. The current trend of suggestive reasoning and ambiguous policy advocacy undermines ethical principles and fails to provide a solid foundation for public health strategies.

Keep reading

Further Ethical Concerns on a Recent Self-Amplifying RNA Vaccine Study

I called for the ongoing study to be ceased given the mass safety signal pointed out by The McCullough Foundation.

Today, I outline further ethical flaws:

  1. Informed Consent:
  • Participants must be fully informed about the novel nature of srRNA technology, including potential unknown long-term effects. Ensuring that informed consent is genuinely informed is critical.
  • Detailed information about the potential risks and benefits, including those observed in preclinical and early-phase clinical trials, should be provided.
  • Since the long-term risks are unknown, this seems impossible.
  1. Conflict of Interest:
  • The authors are employees of Replicate Bioscience Inc., which raises concerns about bias. The review should disclose how the conflict of interest was managed.
  • Independent oversight or review by third-party experts who do not stand to benefit financially from the vaccine should be conducted.
  1. Safety Monitoring:
  • Continuous monitoring for adverse effects is essential, especially given the novel nature of srRNA vectors.
  • Clear protocols for reporting and managing adverse events, including long-term follow-up, and plans to mitigate the ill-health effects of AEs and SAEs, must be transparent and outlined up-front.
  1. Methodological Issues

Cause of Death Determination:

  • Accurate determination of causes of death in clinical trials is crucial. There should be a standardized protocol for post-mortem analysis to ascertain whether deaths are related to the vaccine or underlying conditions. Doctors working for the company determining that the vaccine was not the cause of death is insufficient: it’s a novel vaccine: how do they know they are not confusing deaths from COVID19 with deaths from vaccines? PCR is known to be fraught with errors in this context. How do they know that the vaccine does not interact with COVID19 infection and increase mortality?
  • Independent medical reviews of cause-of-death determinations can mitigate bias.

Manufacturing Quality:

  • The article mentions impurities from poor manufacturing that lead to systemic inflammatory responses. To minimize such risks, strict quality control measures and validation processes should be in place.
  • Detailed documentation and transparency regarding manufacturing practices are essential to ensure reproducibility and safety.

Keep reading