To whomever, it may concern,
For
months now I have been working to draw attention to deliberate lies and
inconsistencies pertaining to the Coronavirus narrative. I suppose I had some
hope that there were people willing to do what our forefathers did and put
their necks on the line in defense of liberty. I suppose I was wrong. In this
letter, I will provide the links to the information which shows there is no need
for mandated vaccines, and frankly, information that should have stopped this
dead in its tracks long ago.
First
and foremost, I need to remind you that Dr. Fauci has been exposed as a liar.
He has been exposed for funding GAIN
OF FUNCTION RESEARCH. Are you suggesting that I should be
forced to take a vaccine that was just proven to be manipulated to be more
dangerous? How can you justify this when there is other information which
discredits the entire narrative? Furthermore, the director of the National
Institute of Health has just resigned due to this revelation. Francis
Collins, NIH Director, Resigns After Gain-of-Function Falsehood Exposed (breitbart.com) The Deputy Director of NIH recently
admitted that Gain of Function Research was conducted with SARS COV-2. Vaccines
cannot be undone. By mandating me to take this vaccine you are requiring I be
injected with a substance invented to fight a disease that was manufactured
through gain of function research, to be more virulent, in a laboratory. NIH
admits US-funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan (nypost.com)
The
following is from the CDC’s own document entitled-CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus
(2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. On page 40 they admit there
was no isolated sample of covid 19 when they developed the PCR testing
procedures. The following is from that document-
Since no quantified virus isolates of the
2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and
this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were
tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full-length RNA (N
gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into
a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport
medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using
the QIAGEN EZ1 Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and
manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR
assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific TaqPath™ 1-Step
RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx
RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR
Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.
CDC
2019 Novel Coronavirus (nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel - Instructions
for Use (fda.gov)
If
there was no isolated sample of the virus from which they developed the PCR
test, what did they use to develop the vaccine? Can you tell me what they mean
when they say, “viral transport medium to mimic the clinical specimen?” If you
can’t explain that do you not have a moral imperative to find out what that
means? Does this not violate laws concerning informed consent such as 38 U.S. Code 7331?
Are
you aware of the legal and scientific processes which are required in the
documenting of new viruses? If not, here is some information on that for you to
read. WHERE
IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE 'NOVEL CORONAVIRUS', 'SARS-CoV-2'? -
Dr. Kevin P. Corbett - Evidence Not Fear
This
is important because the W.H.O.
acknowledged that the PCR tests were producing high rates of false tests. In
June 2021 the CDC
announced they were halting the use of the PCR tests by December 2021.
In their own words, they are calling for something that can differentiate
between the flu and Covid-19. Can you explain why? Can you explain what testing
procedures they are using now and how they are ensuring they are not producing
false positives? If you cannot, do you not have the moral imperative to find
out for the sake of your employees? Lab
Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing
Last
summer Dr. Birx admitted that they were labeling all deaths as covid-19 deaths.
The number of those allegedly killed by Covid was revised several times over to
reflect the number of those who may have died from other health complications.
The CDC, this past June, released the following report ̶ Underlying Medical Conditions and Severe Illness
Among 540,677 Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19, March 2020-March 2021. In their own words, the death of 94.9% of the
540, 677 people hospitalized due to COVID-19 can be attributed to comorbidities
such as heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and even high rates of anxiety. This means, and we have known this all along, that only a
small percentage of the population are affected by Covid-19 in a
life-threatening way. Furthermore, in this report the CDC states that only
people at risk from these other underlying ailments should be targeted for
vaccination. The following quote is from that report-
In
October 2020, The
New England Journal of Medicine released their article
entitled Ensuring Uptake of Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 where they essentially
recommend employers be tasked with mandating the vaccine because it would avoid
the “constitutional due-process issues” of government mandating it. They also
state that the vaccine should only be mandated by employers if there is a
system of accountability in place. Are you going to take responsibility for
adverse reactions? If not, you have a moral imperative to protect your employees
from possible harm. The following is a quote from that article-
Ensuring
Uptake of Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 (nejm.org)
“Neither fines nor criminal penalties
should be used, however; fines disadvantage the poor, and criminal penalties invite
legal challenges on procedural due-process grounds. Both are bad public health
policy for a Covid-19 vaccine because they may stoke distrust without improving
uptake.”
I
would urge you to read it. To avoid these issues, they are putting the burden
on you, and it has been planned that way.
The
FDA press release letter clearly states there is an increased
risk for Myocarditis and, that the long-term effects of the vaccine are not yet
known.
“Additionally, the FDA conducted a rigorous evaluation of the
post-authorization safety surveillance data pertaining to myocarditis and
pericarditis following administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine
and has determined that the data demonstrate increased risks, particularly
within the seven days following the second dose. The observed risk is higher
among males under 40 years of age compared to females and older males. The
observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age. Available data
from short-term follow-up suggest that most individuals have had resolution of
symptoms. However, some individuals required intensive care support. Information
is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes. The
Comirnaty Prescribing Information includes a warning about these risks.” FDA
Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine | FDA
Are you prepared to
inform me and other employees about the possibility of these risks and the
unknown long-term effects based on our own individual health histories? If not,
how can you rightfully and morally mandate a vaccine simply because you are
being told to? The government may offer some protection against liability but
in the long run, adverse reactions will be the responsibility of those forcing
the vaccine on their employees under duress of losing their jobs. That is a
false choice that employees cannot be held responsible for when they are being
forced.
I would urge you to read the vaccine approval letters from the FDA to Pfizer. They
clearly state that what was approved was a vaccine called COMIRNATY, which they
claim is the same ingredients of the Pfizer Bio-n-Tech vaccine. However, the
Pfizer vaccine was only reauthorized under the emergency use authorization. Can
you assure me that the shot you will be requiring me to take is the Comirnaty
vaccine and not the Pfizer Bio-N-Tech? If not, you are forcing me to take a
shot that is still under the EUA. If you cannot make sense of this information,
then do you not have the moral imperative to find out exactly what is going on
if you are going to force your employees to be vaccinated? Senator Ron Johnson
has sent two letters to the FDA demanding clarification on this issue to which
he has received no response. Under federal law, it is illegal to require a
vaccine which is still under emergency use authorization, or if there are other
effective means available to treat the disease.
“On August 23, 2021, FDA approved the biologics license
application (BLA) submitted by BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH for COMIRNATY
(COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) for active immunization to prevent COVID-19 caused by
SARS-CoV-2 in individuals 16 years of age and older. On August 23,
2021, having concluded that revising this EUA is appropriate to protect the
public health or safety under section 564(g)(2) of the Act, FDA is reissuing
the August 12, 2021 letter of authorization in its entirety with revisions
incorporated to clarify that the EUA will remain in place for the
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for the previously-authorized
indication and uses, and to authorize use of COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA)
under this EUA for certain uses that are not included in the approved BLA.” Pfizer-BioNTech
COVID-19 Vaccine EUA LOA reissued October 20 2021 (fda.gov)
Have you heard the term ANTIBODY
DEPENDENT ENHANCEMENT commonly associated with the mRNA vaccines? It is a process
which allegedly inserts the spike protein of the synthetic virus, (because
remember, the CDC admits they never isolated a virus) into your DNA which in
turn, when later exposed to a similar virus or the so-called virus itself, you
become sicker because your body replicates it. Here is some information on that
as well.
“Antibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through
preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other
respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate
COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Previous respiratory
syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety
risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials. Here, we describe key
ADE mechanisms and discuss mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and
therapies in development. We also outline recently published data to evaluate
the risks and opportunities for antibody-based protection against SARS-CoV-2.”
Can you provide me with
information that guarantees I will not experience this? If you cannot, do you
not have the moral imperative to learn more about it? According to a recent
study, the majority of Covid hospitalizations are occurring because of
anti-body dependent enhancement in fully vaccinated individuals. AI-Powered
DoD Data Analysis Program Named “Project Salus” SHATTERS Official Vaccine
Narrative | SOTN: Alternative News, Analysis & Commentary
(stateofthenation.co)
The Covid-19 pandemic
has been filled with misinformation and deliberate lies meant to scare an
unsuspecting public into compliance with this vaccine effort. The information
has been provided which paints a clear picture at the very least, that forced
vaccinations would be unethical simply because the information is inconsistent.
As it stands right now, there is no recourse for individuals to take as the
pharmaceutical companies and government are immune for prosecution in the event
of adverse reactions. Currently, according to the CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Reaction Reporting System, there have been
thousands of reports since this vaccine was introduced. There is also a federal lawsuit alleging that 45,000 people
have died of this vaccine. With all due respect to you and your organization, unless
you can guarantee my safety and follow the laws of informed consent, which I am
pretty sure I have demonstrated you cannot, you have no legal or moral
authority to force this vaccine on me and it would be, no matter what the
president says, against the law to fire me or anyone else given the
circumstances. I would urge you to jump on board the lawsuit that is being
filed by not only the State of Oklahoma, but twenty other states as well before
making any decisions we all will regret.
Furthermore, it has been
recently discovered that the vaccine is only good for six months before it
starts losing its efficacy. Are you prepared to force your employees to get
booster shots every six months to a year?
Effectiveness
of mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine up to 6 months in a large integrated health
system in the USA: a retrospective cohort study (thelancet.com)
I
would also like to highlight my religious objections to this vaccine as well as
all others. Revelations 13:17 clearly states that a mark will come and if men
refuse to take it, they will not be able to buy or sell. Clearly, with the idea
of vaccine passports and some businesses refusing services, and even some
hospitals refusing organ transplants if patients do not have this vaccine, we
are on this path. It is my sincere religious belief, based on the words in
Revelations and my personal relationship with Christ, that this vaccine
represents such a mark. For the record, I have not taken any vaccines since
being released from active duty over 15 years ago, with the exception of the
swine flu. I only took this one because my wife had my small children injected
with it. If they were gong to suffer any adverse effects, I was going to suffer
them also. My children are now grown, and my wife stands with me in my refusal
to take this vaccine. It is also well known that the use of aborted fetal
tissue was used in the development and testing processes of this vaccine. I
stand 100 percent against all abortions and feel there is no legal, moral of
ethical grounds in which a vaccine that used aborted fetal tissue can be
forced on me or anyone else. COVID-19_Vaccine_Fetal_Cell_Handout.pdf
Some will argue the lives potentially saved would rule out ethical concerns
however, it is clear that this vaccine is not preventing people from
contracting Covid-19. Title VII of the Civil Rights act states that religious
discrimination in the workplace is illegal. It is also illegal to segregate
people based on their religious beliefs or, to harass people based on their
religious beliefs. Making people justify their religious beliefs in response to
a mandated vaccine which is still authorized under emergency use could
constitute harassment and segregation. Drawing any attention towards those
people who have chosen to not get vaccinated because of religious reasons
certainly would be considered harassment and making them follow any different
procedures because of their unvaccinated status would be singling them out,
thus, constituting segregation.
There
is one final point I would like to make. Congress,
the people we elect, are exempt from this mandate.
This means they are sitting back letting you, the civilian business owner,
assume all the risks in doing so. Is that right? Shouldn’t the people we elect
to represent us be subject to the same laws, or at the very least, be working
to protect your interests? After all, they are not the ones with money invested
in employee training and other business details associated with retaining
good, dependable help. It is becoming abundantly clear that millions across the
country are refusing this vaccine and many employers, consequently, are
suffering a lack of staff. Do you think this is the right way to go? Is it
right that this burden was placed on you because the government knew they
didn’t have the lawful authority to do it?
Thank
you
David
Risselada
No comments:
Post a Comment