Employer threatening to fire you if you don't take the Big Pharma death-shot? Great! Tell them: You're in violation of Federal Code Of Regs | |
DaveNKansas
User ID: 80646086 United States 01/03/2022 08:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Justice4all
User ID: 80744161 United States 01/03/2022 10:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Re: Employer threatening to fire you if you don't take the Big Pharma death-shot? Great! Tell them: You're in violation of Federal Code Of Regs Those sections cover what an "Investigator" (i.e. the one doing the clinical trial) cannot do. They must have informed consent, etc. Doesn't talk about third parties like employers. They aren't in violation of of the CFR sections; the investigator (ex. vax manufacturer) who gets your "informed consent" which you gave under duress because your employer is "making you" might have a problem, if these manufacturers cared about that, but they don't. Having done employment law for 38 years, an employee telling an employer anything akin to a legal argument generally gets you nowhere, unless they are completely unsophisticated and have no legal counsel of their own, which isn't likely. |
UltimateMirror
User ID: 81759628 United States 01/05/2022 08:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Re: Employer threatening to fire you if you don't take the Big Pharma death-shot? Great! Tell them: You're in violation of Federal Code Of Regs Most people are CLUELESS about their RIGHTS. Your rights are deemed WAIVED if you do not know them! We have the right to INFORMED CONSENT. Established during the NUREMBERG TRIALS. Reaffirmed by the US Supreme Court in 2013 YOU HAVE A GUARANTEED INFORMED CONSENT RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM "...the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or corercion..." -Binding International Law Treaties- Research UNESCO Universal Bioethics Declaration: Article-Consent [link to portal.unesco.org] Informed Consent is SPECIFICALLY PROTECTED under US law. Even a "...diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish the ...privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing the ...skin...this Court has never retreated from it's recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constititionally protected privacty interests..." US Supreme Court, MISSOURI v McNEELY, 2013 Please also go to: [link to www.DrRimaTruthReports.com] Please also go to: [link to americasfrontlinedoctors.org (secure)] THEY (psychopaths) ARE BEING SUED. YOU WILL NOT HEAR ABOUT THIS ON CNN (communist news network) |