2023, just before another election year, rumors are flying that mask mandates will be implemented in the near future. This means that parents will be forced again to submit religious exemptions to mask mandates for children. In these trying times, parents find themselves once more standing up for their cherished rights and liberties, particularly in the context of mask mandates for their children. It’s a rallying cry for freedom, a reminder that parents, not institutions, should have the final say in raising their kids. These new mask mandates are being rolled out again. We want to empower you as an individual and a parent to stand your ground confidently and respectfully.
One mom’s response to masking mandates and submitting a religious exemption was, “Child abuse is against my religion!”
Her words echo the sentiments of countless parents who firmly hold that subjecting their children to masks is akin to causing harm. It’s not just about physical well-being; it’s about the mental and emotional toll that masks can exact on our children. Depriving them of the simple joy of seeing smiles and freely breathing can stifle their growth and happiness.
Do we know that masks are harmful to the health and well-being of our children?
The research says yes.
Do they create fear?
Yes.
Looking for the research? There is a plethora found in this drive.
At the core of this issue is the belief that parents are answerable to a higher power—God—for the way they nurture their children. The facts are clear: the risks posed to children by the pandemic are relatively low. So, why should parents be coerced into accepting mask mandates they feel are unnecessary and even harmful to their little ones?
But it’s essential to remember that these concerns are rooted in sincere convictions. Parents who assert religious objections to mask mandates genuinely believe these mandates are detrimental to their children’s health and well-being. They see masks as instruments of fear and tools to enforce what they perceive as “unlawful and unjust rules.” In our eyes, it’s not just about protecting our kids; it’s about preserving the inalienable right to parent as we believe God intended.
This is a matter of personal conscience. A firmly held moral belief that your children are a gift from God and that he grants you wisdom and authority to raise them as he directs your heart.
Religious Exemption for Mask To wear a mask on my face goes against God and my religious beliefs.
As a Christian, I view the mask as an affront to what I know to be true in the Word of God.
We know that wearing a mask is part of a satanic ritual, a humiliation ritual, which the God of the Bible says we are to abstain from engaging in rituals. Eph 5:11 “..Take no part in unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.”
Gen 1:27, Gen 9:26, and Col 3:10 says that I am made in the image and likeness of God. As Job 33:4 states perfectly, “The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” I will not hide the image of God nor hinder the breath of life which is my very connection to my creator.
The command from God to “fear not” is written hundreds of times in the Bible. Our generous Abba, Father has given us a reminder for every day of the year to “fear not” because He wants us to look to Him, not the world, for our protection and provision.
2 Timothy 1:7 “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.” From this scripture, we see that a sound mind cannot exist with the spirit of fear. In fact, the spirit of fear makes us slaves according to Romans 8:15 “So you have not received a spirit that makes you fearful slaves. Instead, you received God’s Spirit when he adopted you as his own children. Now we call him, “Abba, Father.”
The good news is in 1 John 4:18 “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.” We know that God is love so there is no fear in God which leads to the understanding that the spirit of fear will separate me from God and His perfect love. Not trusting in God is an abomination to God.
Heb 11:6 “And without faith, it is impossible to please Him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who seek Him.” 1 Cor 2:5 “That your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. I have faith that I am made perfectly by my creator with a perfectly designed immune system as God saw that His creation was good in Gen 1:3. Romans 1:17 says that the righteous live by faith and Mark 10:52 says that we can experience healing through faith. Therefore, my faith is in the one true creator God not the shifting direction of Dr Fauci and is 1 mask, 2 mask, goggles, distancing, and gloves. My religious liberty is my birthright and is supported by the Constitution.
“Smart” meters are the gas, electric, water, propane, and solar utility meters being put on homes to replace the old analog meters. Smart meters emit high amounts of wi-fi radiation 24/7, and it goes through the walls and into our homes, schools, and businesses. There is an extensive literature database with an inventory of 38,224 publications and 6,994 summaries of individual scientific studies on the effects of electromagnetic fields. Smart is a marketing term used by industry to psychologically steer consumers to adopt these devices — inferring “smart” is a good choice when it is not.
“Smart” does not equal safe!
Smart meters emit high amounts of wi-fi radiation 24/7, and it goes through the walls and into our homes, schools, and businesses. There is an extensive literature database with an inventory of 38,224 publications and 6,994 summaries of individual scientific studies on the effects of electromagnetic fields.
Smart meters emit microwave radiation by using digital technology. This three-minute video prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities demonstrates how electric meters pulse radiation thousands of times per day:
Our bodies need a break from the wi-fi radiation we are constantly bathed in. Suppose smart meters and other devices are emitting radiation 24/7. In that case, it can be harmful to our cells, disrupt our circadian rhythm, and impair the required cell repair and regeneration while we sleep, which otherwise keeps us healthy. The result is a toxic build-up that shows up sooner rather than later in some behavioral problems that look like ADD or Autism, sleep disruption, fatigue, headaches, dizziness, nausea, nosebleeds, skin rashes/flushing, and more. The long-term accumulative effects may include cancers, infertility, genotoxicity, neurotoxicity, and more. *Biological and Health Affects
See the Science page with an extensive literature database with an inventory of 38,224 publications and 6,994 summaries of individual scientific studies on the effects of electromagnetic fields.
Children’s Health Defense interviewed the Regional Leader of Health Freedom Idaho, Peggy Edwards, about her fight against the power company’s threat of shutting down their electricity over concerns about the smart meter and her special needs child.
Rexburg, Idaho – On April 14, 2023, at 7 pm, the Rexburg Senior Center will host a community screening of the documentary film Generation Zapped, followed by a discussion on the dangers of wireless radiation. The event is being hosted by Health Freedom Idaho, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting and protecting health freedom in the state.
Generation Zapped is a documentary that explores the potential health risks of wireless technology and the dangers of electromagnetic radiation. It takes a critical look at the prevalence of wireless devices in our daily lives and raises important questions about the impact that this technology is having on our health and well-being.
Following the screening, attendees will have the opportunity to participate in a discussion and Q&A session with experts in the field. This will be a chance to learn more about the latest research on the health effects of wireless radiation and to gain a better understanding of how we can protect ourselves and our communities.
Massachusetts has a bill to allow ratepayers to choose an analog meter without being penalized by a fee. See all 11 sponsored MA bills below, and consider sharing these with your local, state and federal public servants as most have only been told of the financial benefits of wireless technology without being informed of the biological radiation risks: https://sites.google.com/site/understandingemfs/massachusetts-emf-bills-2021-22
Smart Meter Education Network out of Michigan aims to support the fight against smart meters for the protection of one’s health, privacy and the environment. This group offers how-to information: http://www.smartmetereducationnetwork.com/
Consider hosting a screening of the film Generation Zapped in your community to educate your friends, family and public servants: http://generationzapped.com/
Dr. Tim Schoechle, Ph.D. presents Getting Smarter About the “Smart Grid”: The Technological Alternative Needed for a Successful Energy Economy, a one-hour talk and Q&A given at Creating Safe Havens in a Toxic, Electromagnetic World, a conference hosted by the International Institute for Building-Biology & Ecology:
Dr. Darren Schmidt, Chiropractor, explains how “smart” meters affect your body:
Dr. Federica Lamech, MBBS, authored Self-Reporting of Symptom Development from Exposure to Wireless Smart Meters’ Radiofrequency Fields in Victoria. It is a well documented 92 case series that is scientifically valid. It clearly demonstrates adverse health effects in the human population from smart meter emissions. This was endorsed by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine: https://www.emfacts.com/2013/11/wireless-smart-meter-case-studies-in-victoria-australia/
Jerry Flynn served in the Canadian military for 26 years specializing in wireless radio systems, radio warfare and electronic warfare. He provides a history of military knowledge of harm from electromagnetic radiation, and why he is gravely concerned for the rollout of smart utility meters and the rest of our wireless devices: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-F3nf47kAs
Solar Panels & Meters
In the U.S., most companies installing solar panel energy systems also install a solar smart meter to capture data. The Itron Solar Meter is one such device and residents, landlords and business owners would be wise to ensure they are installed with maximum distance in mind, avoiding heavily used common areas or sleeping areas: https://www.itron.com/na/solutions/product-catalog/solar-meter
In Idaho, 14-year-old children do not require the consent of their parents to authorize hospital, medical and surgical care. School medical staff and health facilities are fully aware of this loophole around parental authority.
Predatory adults can take advantage of our impressionable preteens and put their health at risk if we don’t see a full repeal of this statute 39-3801.
MINORS — CONSENT TO TREATMENT 39-3801. INFECTIOUS, CONTAGIOUS, OR COMMUNICABLE DISEASE — MEDICAL TREATMENT OF MINOR 14 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER — CONSENT OF PARENTS OR GUARDIAN UNNECESSARY. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a minor fourteen (14) years of age or older who may have come into contact with any infectious, contagious, or communicable disease may give consent to the furnishing of hospital, medical and surgical care related to the diagnosis or treatment of such disease, if the disease or condition is one which is required by law, or regulation adopted pursuant to law, to be reported to the local health officer. Such consent shall not be subject to disaffirmance because of a minority. The consent of the parent, parents, or legal guardian of such minor shall not be necessary to authorize hospital, medical and surgical care related to such disease, and such parent, parents, or legal guardian shall not be liable for payment for any care rendered pursuant to this section.History:[39-3801, added 1971, ch. 107, sec. 1, p. 227.]
Does this mean that your 14-year-old could receive a vaccination, diagnosis and treatment at a school health clinic without your authority or permission? According to our law, “Consent of the parent or guardian is UNNECESSARY!“
Think that it doesn’t affect your family, or there will be no chance of it happening.
West Ada School District hired more nurses and is Opening medical clinics on school and district properties.
Concerns brought up in the 2021 Legislative Session
These predators know that 39-3801 Idaho Code exists. HFI and Rep Priscilla Giddings brought to the attention of Chairman Fred Woods during the 2021 Regular Legislative Session that this section of the code needed to be repealed to preserve parental authority. Fred Wood refused a print hearing.
Consider this scenario of the infectious disease that has put us in a state of emergency COVID-19:
Imagine you are 14 and a freshman in high school. You are on “the list” because your parents have a vax exemption on file for you or some other reason the school knows you haven’t been injected yet with experimental mRNA gene therapy (aka medical treatment). Your 14-year-old friends have all had it. They are heckling you. You feel like the freak. The nurse calls you to the office and says, “Look right here, Idaho law says you are mature enough to make this decision on your own.” How many of us at 14 could have pushed back and said no??
Despite a huge public outcry, consisting of more than 31,000 public comments posted on the CDC’s website, despite hundreds of experts warning of serious risks to children, the Centers for Disease Control has voted to add the Covid mRNA vaccine to the VFC Program, which provides free Vaccines for children and as well as add the COVID-19 vaccines for children as young as six months old to the new Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedules, which will be rolled out in February 2023. This will add 54 injections (72 antigens because of combined shots like MMR) to 72 injections (90 antigens.) Its nothing to do with health. This will allow the pharmaceutical companies to escape product liability which means the “emergency” can end, but the liability protection for the pharmaceutical companies continues.
More than a dozen states automatically add new CDC recommendations to their required schedule of vaccines for schools and daycares.There is information about vaccine laws and exemptions in every state here.
TELL HEALTH DEPARTMENT NO! WE DON’T WANT THE COVID VAX FOR SCHOOL
Idaho will require the Health Department to submit a rule change to the legislature. Prior to that submission, they are required to host public hearings. IT IS TIME TO SPEAK UP NOW AND SAY “NO!”
“Every state must reject this CDC mandate for children immediately. Even the CDC’s own data reveals that these COVID shots are harming children. Pharmaceutical companies merely see children as a budget item to increase their bottom line and they continue to ignore the serious adverse events and deaths caused by these experimental shots.”
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver
Call to Action
We know you are outraged and want to take action immediately. Now is the time for the parents and grandparents to reach out to the Health Department, the Education Department, and school administration, as well as the legislators who are running for office, and let them know that there is no medical or scientific justification to add a vaccine to the childhood schedule especially when there is no clinical data to justify shot.
Parents hold power — don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Make clear to your superintendent and commissioner that exemptions are not enough and that you will be pulling your child from school if this vaccine is mandated for attendance, costing the district tens of thousands of dollars in funding.
Sherri Ybarra: Superintendent of Public Instruction Telephone 208-334-2270 Fax 208-334-2632
Today’s vote on adding the COVID-19 vaccines means 18 more shots — one per year between the ages of 6 months and 18 years — will be added to the schedule, according to Toby Rogers, Ph.D.
“So overnight the childhood schedule would go from 54 injections (72 antigens because of combined shots like MMR) to 72 injections (90 antigens),” Rogers said. “This has absolutely nothing to do with health — it’s all about profit and power.”
The accepted COVID-19 vaccine recommendations that will go into effect in 2023 include the following primary series:
Age 6 months-4 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 3-dose series at 0, 3-8, 11-16 weeks (Pfizer-BioNTech)
Age 5-11 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 2-dose series at 0, 3-8 weeks (Pfizer-BioNTech)
Age 12-18 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 2-dose series at 0, 3-8 weeks (Novavax, Pfizer-BioNTech)
For children who are moderately or severely immunocompromised, the recommended primary doses are increased from a 2-dose series to a 3-dose series.
CDC DATA REFLECTS THE SHOT IS NOT SAFE FOR CHILDREN!
Ironically, the CDC presented data at its ACIP meeting on September 1, 2022, that confirms that COVID shots are not safe for children. The data presented were summaries of reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), Vaccine Safety Data Link (VSD), a private insurance-based system that monitors hospital records, and V-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based monitoring program that relies on text messages and web surveys.
The data presented at the ACIP meeting revealed that within seven days after vaccination, 40-50 percent of children 5-11 years of age reported a “systemic reaction,” 10-15 percent had a “health impact,” and 2-4 percent needed “medical care.” Within seven days of vaccination, 60-75 percent of children 12-17 years had “any systemic reaction,” 10 to 25 percent were “unable to perform daily activities,” and 5 to 20 percent were “unable to work or attend school.”
Therefore, more than 30 percent of children in this age group had a health impact after the second shot, and booster dose, and approximately 2 percent needed medical care.
The CDC data clearly shows that these injections are not safe for children and teens and should be discontinued immediately. Other countries, like the UnitedKingdom, stopped the COVID shots for children under 12 years, except for children in high-risk categories. Sweden has also decided against recommending COVID shots for children aged 5-11. (SOURCE)
Government Protects the Billion Dollar Pharmaceutical Companies at the Expense of Our Children
By adding the COVID shots to the childhood schedule, transferring liability for vaccine injuries to the federal government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This delivers permanent legal protection to Pfizer and Moderna by allowing them to bring an FDA-approved shot to the market without facing lawsuits and bring in billions of dollars in revenues for the drug companies.
Pharmaceutical companies are not liable for injuries or deaths associated with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) injections but can be held liable for injuries caused by a fully licensed “vaccine,” unless that shot is added to the CDC’s childhood schedule. This means liability protection also includes the adult COVID shots as well. This will allow the pharmaceutical companies to escape product liability which means the “emergency” can end, but the liability protection continues.
REPORTED INJURY AND DEATH ARE NOT ADEQUATELY TRACKED
Vaccine injury reports have skyrocketed since the COVID vaccines. This voluntary reporting system doesn’t adequately track the injuries and deaths associated with the shots. Individuals experiencing reactions are not reported by medical facilities in a consistent or regular basis. However, the reports that are coming in are shocking and leave little doubt that this shot is causing long-term harm to many. OpenVaers.com
More than 83% of Idaho CPS investigations are based on bogus and false claims. The department says it must investigate every call.
CPS investigates 45,000 Idaho families each year- will your family be a target?
In every one of those cases, CPS has told the parents that they must submit to questioning and entry into their home. In addition, CPS investigators tell parents they must present their children for interrogation and examination of the children by government workers outside of the presence of the parents.
Idaho CPS social workers say that “nobody ever questions” these intrusions into the family home and the privacy of the relationship between parents and children.
Based on years of being with families as they walk through the CPS investigation, we determined that there are five critical steps you must take to protect your children during a CPS investigation.
Thea’s son Daniel was taken by CPS from his father, who lives in Idaho. Thea lives in Arizona and had no charges against her YET her son was kidnapped by Idaho CPS.
The state delayed the hearing, which should have reunited mother and son. Consequently, Daniel was placed into foster care. As if these events weren’t outrageous enough, the foster parents and the school 🗣 LOST DANIEL!
Daniel, has autism which gives him an IEP for his special needs at school. The state, including CPS, case workers, foster parents, and the school, should be well aware of Daniel’s needs. At home, with his mother, Daniel has a guide who stays with him all day to make sure he gets to where he needs to go. Now, in foster care, he is lost in the bus system, lost and confused, not knowing where to go. Brown Bus Co called Thea at 4:44 pm, who desperately wants her son back and has never had this problem, to let her know they had her son and he was lost. Thea reached out to the police for help. The same police who took her son returned Daniel to the foster parents, who already seemed to be neglecting him.
🙇♀Can you imagine if you lost your special needs child and they were found on a bus hours after school got out? CPS would definitely take your child and call it neglect. If a foster parent loses a special needs child, it’s swept under the rug, shrugged off, and the police return the child to the negligent foster parents. Sick! 😡
Thea was able to hire a private attorney due to your support. She is desperate to get her son back as she has been cut off from visitations, most like in retaliation for her speaking out against the corrupt CPS who has stolen her son. Please help her raise funds needed for her attorney and stay in Idaho. 💝
Daniel was taken by CPS from his dad, who has been homeless and has not given Daniel the meds, treatment, or care that Daniel needs for his autism. Thea lives in AZ, has crippling rheumatoid arthritis, and has now had a stroke due to the stress. Her next hearing is Aug 1st, and she is in desperate need of an attorney not on the government, taxpayer-funded payroll. Please donate what you can so she can hire the attorney she has chosen for her case. Time is of the essence.
I used to believe, as most still do, that Child Protective Services only interfered in the sanctity of the family if there was extreme abuse or neglect. I remember hearing stories of children who, for example, had cigarette burns or were locked in closets with no food. Of course, we would want children rescued from situations such as these. Every child deserves to be loved, cherished, and nurtured. Then, I started to read stories of families that claimed to be loving parents but were having their children taken for something as simple as wanting a second opinion when a doctor recommended chemo. My heart would break. I imagined that I, too, would want a second opinion and maybe even a third when it came to something as serious as agreeing to chemo for any of my children.
When I read these cases, I often thought, “there must be more to the story.” So I looked for any other info that I could find to support CPS intervention. I did not want to believe that they were getting involved in issues such as medical decisions for children.
DOWNLOAD YOUR FREE BOOKLET: What To Do When CPS Knocks. Protecting Your Children in a CPS Investigation
“Neglected” means a child: (a) Who is without proper parental care and control, or subsistence, medical or other care or control necessary for his well-being because of the conduct or omission of his parents, guardian, or other custodian or their neglect or refusal to provide them…
16-1602-(31) NEGLECT Medical Reasons
In Nov 2017, I received a call. ‘A newborn baby is being removed from the care of his parents.‘ The father claimed that “everything changed” with the medical staff at Kootenai Health Hospital when he declined the Hep B vaccine for baby Elijah. Sure enough, when I read the police report, this was listed as one of the reasons they believed Elijah to be in imminent danger. Another reason they cited was that the father continued to allow his baby to sleep on his chest against medical advice. These new parents had to go to court to prove their ability to care for their new son. Baby Elijah was returned to his loving parents after 10 days of separation. He was never unable to breastfeed, therefore missing out on precious bonding and vital nutrients for immune system development. We will never know the full impact on his precious life.
Health Freedom Idaho reported on this medical kidnapping case, and I mistakenly thought that this was a rare case. Soon people from all over Idaho and even other states started calling me about their interactions with CPS. I was overwhelmed with grief for these families. And for the children who no longer had the safety of their homes and families.
DETRIMENTAL CPS INTERVENTION IS NOT RARE
A father called me one afternoon while I was on vacation. I remember enjoying the sun by the pool when I received his call. My day and life changed when he told me his heart-wrenching story. In Idaho, by statute, everyone is a mandatory reporter. In Idaho, every citizen is REQUIRED to call CPS if they suspect that a child is being abused or neglected. His neighbor had called CPS because the children often played outside, and she claimed that the mother was yelling at the children.
CPS came to her door, and she made the mistake of letting them in. They cited dirty dishes, laundry on the sofa, and the toilet seat up as imminent danger and reasons to remove all three children. I learned that when children are taken, they are immediately whisked to a doctor’s office for a full physical.
Even if there is no allegation of sexual abuse, they are still looking at every part of your child’s body. We raise our children with the knowledge that no one is to be looking at their private areas, and there they are without their parents being looked over and examined by a perfect stranger.
There is no parental consent given, and yet the parents will be sent the bill for this assault to their children. After we hung up, I lay there listening to children laugh and play while tears ran down my face in the grief of what was happening to precious children who did nothing wrong but would never be the same after this violation.
Even though these children were returned to their parents after several months, they will never again believe their home to be a safe place or that their parents can protect them from the overreaching hand of the government. This family would be broken beyond repair. The parents ended up divorcing. One of the children, who was under 12 at the time, threatened suicide. I would later learn that this is a common outcome when CPS intervenes on unfounded claims.
In Idaho, 72% of cases investigated by CPS each year are allegations of neglect, and 83% of those are unfounded.
The fact of the matter is that over 80% of the calls that are called into CPS are false and bogus. But CPS says all calls have to be investigated. In Idaho statistics reveal that almost 80% of the children removed from their parents are returned to their parents. The reality is any visit by CPS should be taken VERY seriously.
The most significant mistakes made by parents are usually in the very first encounter. If you can understand how to handle the very first encounter with CPS, you can increase your chances of maintaining your family’s rights and freedom.
I have received multiple phone calls from parents about CPS being used as coercion at Kootenai Health. Health Freedom Idaho and Idaho CPS held a protest at this hospital due to the overwhelming amount of stories from this particular hospital.
One of the more horrendous stories was from a mother who had taken her 21-day old baby for a well-baby check and found herself in the emergency room with three attempts at a spinal tap on her newborn. Her husband was at home with influenza A, and when she relayed this to the pediatrician, he sent her straight to the emergency room. Once there, the doctor decided it was imperative to attempt a spinal tap on a 21-day old baby with absolutely no symptoms. The mother requested to wait on such interventions after the blood tests came back to see if there was any indication of infection. With no informed consent or any consent at all, they gave her baby antibiotics and attempted the spinal tap three times. She adamantly refused the fourth attempt, and CPS was called. This particular hospital considers it medical neglect if you dare to question or disagree with the doctor and will call CPS. This action begs the question, how can a CPS caseworker determine whether or not the mother should have allowed the fourth attempt at a spinal tap? What training do they have to decide such things? I can imagine that it would be a very uncomfortable position for a CPS caseworker to be put in between a mother and a medical doctor to determine what medical neglect is.
Parents tell stories of increased overnights at the hospital, tests they would never have agreed to, and interventions that they would have otherwise declined. However, they agreed to such things against their better judgment after the threat of CPS being called. After recording these parents’ stories, the logical question that we asked was, “Is Kootenai Health using CPS to increase their profits?”
We know that this isn’t just happening at Kootenai Health. We are getting phone calls and messages from families all over Idaho and the US. Scaring parents into complying with doctors’ orders by using the threat of CPS is a national problem, so we have a job to do.
PARENTAL AUTHORITY: We have a biblical responsibility for our children.
[1] … Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. [2] “Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment with promise: [3] “that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.”
Ephesians 6:1-3 NKJV
[6] “And these words I command you today shall be in your heart. [7] You shall teach them diligently to your children and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. …
Deuteronomy 6:6-7 NKJV
I’ve selected only these two from multiple scriptures throughout the Bible that direct children to obey their parents and call parents to teach their children. The Bible clarifies why children should obey their parents; it says that life will go better for them. Nowhere in the Bible indicates that children should obey the government because it was never God’s design for children to be subject to the government. These scriptures also direct parents to teach their own children. YES! That is our God-given authority and also our duty.
PARENTAL AUTHORITY: Protected as a Constitutional Right
We frequently treat the Constitution as the creation of our rights. But, citizens, we have natural rights given to us at birth by our Creator. Let’s remember that our Constitution was designed to protect and support our natural rights.
We need to approach any interaction with CPS from this position. If you don’t understand your God-given authority over your children (supported by the Constitution), your rights can be trampled on and violated. You must understand these rights as you are the chosen protector of your children.
RETHINKING FOSTER CARE. An alternative for families in crisis.
As you read the information, I am providing here, keep in mind that they must pay the staff, rent, keep lights on, and make a profit. They make this income by taking your children and making as much money on them as possible while in foster care with a dangling carrot bonus if they reach the goal of adoption.
HISTORY OF THE FUNDING OF CPS
The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974 doesn’t receive nearly the attention that ASFA does, yet it is the piece of legislation that established Child Protective Services in all 50 states.
CAPTA was written into law, giving power to the social workers to direct law enforcement to snatch children from their families and ask questions later. This action is a violation of due process!
Though CAPTA funding doesn’t reach the levels of ASFA, it still opened the door to federal funding for states to take children and place them into foster care. CAPTA also encourages states to enact mandatory reporting laws. As a result, Congress periodically renewed CAPTA, and this legislation remains the foundational force behind the federally-funded CPS state today.
ASFA – the Clintons’ Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 provides billions of federal dollars to states to place children in foster care and adopt them out to strangers. Where once the emphasis was placed on trying to eventually reunite children with their biological parents, state and federal guidelines now favored fast-tracking adoption of children in foster care. This requirement changes the focus to terminating the biological parent’s rights. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 bonus for each child adopted and an additional $2,000 for a “special needs” child. Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing in.
The subject of taxation is often debated between those who say taxation is theft and those that believe taxation is a duty. Wherever you land in this debate, we can all agree that our tax money should not be used to remove children from happy homes and enter into a government program with more risk of harm.
Child Welfare collects Title IV E Funds afforded by a 1997 Act signed by then-President Bill Clinton, which allows states to get rich while keeping kids under state care.
FOSTER CARE IS FUNDED BY SOCIAL SECURITY.
Are you ready for this? They are robbing your social security account and using it to steal our children.
No wonder there is continual talk of Social Security money running out by the time my generation is of the age to use the money that we have paid in. Should we continue to allow our Social Security money to be robbed to fund a government program that is ineffective and harmful to children and families, and the community?
FOSTER CHILDREN ARE LOST BY CPS
We know, from a review of federal records, that child welfare agencies throughout the country have closed the cases of at least 61,000 foster children listed as “missing“ since 2000, and an additional 53,000 were listed as “run away.” So, since the year 2000, we have over 110,000 children unaccounted for that have been in the care of CPS.
Idaho CPS has acknowledges they have lost almost a dozen children in one year
Idaho listed 10 children as RUNAWAYS! Did CPS lose ten children?
According to a chilling NCMEC report compiled from FBI data and their own, of nearly 25,000 runaways reported to NCMEC in 2017, 1 in 7 were likely victims of child sex trafficking. Of those, 88% were in the care of social services when they went missing. This is not a one-time event. The data shows that CPS is a consistent source of children for child sex trafficking. In a 2013 FBI 70-city nationwide raid, 60% of the victims came from foster care or group homes. In 2014, NY authorities estimated that 85% of sex trafficking victims were previously in the child welfare system. In 2012, Connecticut police rescued 88 children from sex trafficking, and 86 of those children were from the child welfare system.
FOSTER CHILDREN BECOME VICTIMS
Sadly, foster children are likely to be medicated and the health and welfare department is incentivized to do so.
Foster children receive psychiatric medications up to 13 times more often than children in the general population.
8% of these children on medications received neither treatment planning or medication monitoring. Children under one are twice as likely to be prescribed a psychiatric drug compared to non-foster children.
Keep in mind that the more medications the child is on and services they need the more money this agency brings in. Once again the incentives are not set up in the best interest of the child.
Children who stay with parents who are accused (but not arrested or convicted) of “abuse” or “neglect” do better than most of the children being put into foster care. USA Today reported on the largest study done at the time to look at the effects of foster care.
The study confirms that children who can remain in their homes do better than in foster care. Children whose families are investigated for abuse or neglect are likely to do better in life if they stay with their families than if they go into foster care, according to a pioneering study. Kids who stayed with their families were less likely to become juvenile delinquents or teen mothers and more likely to hold jobs as young adults, says the study by Joseph Doyle
Doyle performed another study, one year later, comparing children left in troubled homes with foster care children to see which group was more likely to be arrested as adults.
The study looked at 23,000 children, and it found that “children placed in foster care have arrest, conviction, and imprisonment rates as adults that are three times higher than those of children who remained at home.”
In 2019 Idaho’s HB 170 attempted to put the citizens and CPS on equal footing with notification of parental rights bill.
PROTECTING PARENTAL RIGHTS
HB 170 was a transparency bill, requiring the disclosure of already established rights. It does not place any limits on CPS, law enforcement, or prosecutors to investigate reports of child abuse, neglect, or abandonment. But, frankly, the Bill of Rights is precisely a shield between citizens and an overreaching government. The nation’s founders thought it was a good idea in the constitution to create legal obstacles to the state’s unwarranted intrusion of citizens’ homes, persons, and relationships with their children.
I would highly recommend that citizens start requesting bills like this because we have found that most parents do not understand their rights when CPS is at their door. They often make mistakes that they regret later due to a lack of knowledge. The irrevocable harm of not knowing your rights can be as large as losing your child permanently within a matter of months. If any citizen of any state would like to see the verbiage of this bill we would be happy to share it with them.
(You should have already taught your children to NEVER EVER open the door for strangers, even if one of those strangers is a police officer.)
Be polite. Firm. Say as little as possible.
~ Do not let them into your home without a warrant.
~ Record the conversation.
~ Get the investigator’s and supervisors’ contact information.
~ You can ask for the details of the allegations. Don’t settle for abuse/neglect, those are categories, not details.
~ Say as little as possible. If you say nothing to them, you have taken away their greatest weapon, which is their ability to twist your words.
~ Let them know that you will contact your attorney and that any further communication is to go through your attorney.
~ Don’t sign any papers. Signing documents, even a case plan, will put you into contact with them.
~ Close the door.
Keep in mind that the caseworker is there to find evidence to support what he/she already believes to be true, that you abused your child. I have heard of at least two stories directly of parents being served with invalid warrants. Educate yourself on what must be on a valid warrant because, if it is invalid, do not let them in.
The IV and XIV amendments support your God-given rights:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
We know that God has given our children to us as our property and this is supported by the Constitution. Unfortunately, we have allowed local, state, and federal governments to become increasingly involved in that relationship. Our creator has called us to love and nurture our children, raising them in keeping with His word. The belief that the government knows better is being pushed by the media and other sources but the facts do not support this baseless notion. The facts show that the community is, in fact, harmed when the department of health and welfare interferes.
Know your rights:
You have the right to remain silent and to refuse to answer questions.
You have the right to refuse entry to your home or other premises if there is no warrant of a court.
You have the right to consult with an attorney and to have an attorney present during questioning.
You have the right to refuse the questioning of minor children in your home or on your property if there is no warrant to examine your children. Hiring a private attorney who understands your constitutional rights and will help you stand on them is imperative. ~ If you waive your rights, and change your mind during the investigation, you can inform the department immediately of your desire to exercise your rights.
If CPS takes your child:
Contact an attorney or other constitutional parent advocate.
Do not sign anything.
Do not agree to anything.
Do not accept a public defender or any other attorney who says, “it’s easier if you just do what they say“.
Demand due process!
Bring every possible witness to the first shelter care hearing. This is a crucial hearing, although they will try to convince you that it is insignificant.
In the wake of the #MedicalKidnap of Baby Cyrus (See Freedomman.org), several legislators have expressed the need for parental rights protection written into the statute. Well, the legislation has been written (see below) and now needs to be heard and voted upon!
Contact the legislators to vote YES on HB 821
It is CRITICAL that our parental rights are protected. Our children are given to us BY GOD and these inherent rights need to be protected from state departments that have claimed authority over the lives of families. Medical Kidnap is the wrongful removal of a minor or vulnerable adult from a parent or guardian by law enforcement and/or a social worker. Parents/Guardians should always have the final decision in the child or vulnerable adults’ medical care and treatment until those parental rights are terminated by due process in a court.
Our parental rights must be protected. Our children are given to us BY GOD and these inherent rights need protection from state departments that have claimed authority over the lives of families.
REPRESENTATIVES
Due to spam filters, you will need to make 6 copies of your email. Copy the list for each individual group and send the emails. One email for each group.
Here’s the Bill HB 821 sponsored by Senator Zito and Rep. Nichols
It is CRITICAL that our parental rights are protected. Our children are given to us BY GOD and these inherent rights need to be protected from state departments that have claimed authority over the lives of families.
TALKING POINTS:
PARENTAL AUTHORITY: We have a biblical responsibility for our children. Regardless of the family stance in medical intervention, it is a God-given right of parents to determine the modality that they use to pursue wellness for their children. PARENTAL RIGHTS come from God. Even under the most supreme intentions, no government department or hospital staff member should attempt to circumvent parental responsibility
PARENTAL AUTHORITY: Protected as a Constitutional Right.
MEDICAL TREATMENT & INFORMED CONSENT: These are never black and white; they are multifaceted decisions that need to be weighed with informed consent by parents.
MEDICAL TREATMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEE HEALTH. Conventional medical treatments are not a “gold standard,” nor do they the one-size-fits-all treatment that results in 100% success.
Unfortunately, the fight is not over. Levi and Marissa only have Cyrus with them because they agreed to a measure of state oversight and intrusion. Meaning, CPS has to go with them to all appointments and have unlimited access to “pop in” on Levi and Marissa unannounced and all that. If they decide they don’t like any little thing, they can kidnap him again. But the most important thing is that Cyrus is with Marissa and Levi NOW. His health and wellbeing depend on it!
The adjudicatory hearing is on April 8th, and if we don’t continue this fight non-stop through then, it is still possible for the state to take him away again! 🥺
However, for now, we just want to celebrate the blessing of having Baby Cyrus back with his parents. Only through Jesus Christ and his mercy and by your constant, unceasing prayers and support, have we been able to witness this miracle!
We will send you more updated information tomorrow, including an important update regarding a momentous rally we are planning for next week (clear your calendar for March 26th)—but for now, let’s just celebrate together and give God thanks!
Diego Rodriguez Freedom Man Press
P.S. Protests at the Department of Health and Welfare are canceled indefinitely—and we will not be calling for any more protests there unless they forcefully take Cyrus away again—but we are not anticipating that happening. Pray with us…
Many people are being forced to choose between feeding their families and getting injected with a potentially deadly experimental substance. This is a fundamental violation not only of human rights but of the religious rights that we are guaranteed in the United States of America. We are human beings made in the image of God. We have God-given human rights and should not be forced to choose between feeding our families and putting something that is potentially deadly into our bodies.
Your personal convictions do not need the blessing of your church denomination or religious leader.
Very few religious groups in America have adopted a theological statement against vaccination. It’s a sad fact that the leaders of our religious denominations choose not to take a stance. However, all that an employee needs to implement a religious exemption is sincere belief — you don’t need a pastor or a religious leader to get involved.This is a “personal faith” decision, not an “essential faith” decision. It is a legitimate position, even if it is not the official church position.
Federal law also guarantees that individuals have a right to be free from religious discrimination. In order to reconcile these two rights, the law requires employers to make “reasonable accommodation” for individuals with a genuine religious objection to the vaccine.
Your Vaccine Exemption Letter
Your religious exemption letter must be PERSONAL. This is your firmly held moral conviction against vaccination. As with many matters of faith, we don’t often need to defend our beliefs and it can be challenging to find the words to verbalize our internal convictions. Please use these letters as a resource to help you formulate those points that you find most personally convicting and draft your religious exemption in your own words.
Scripture References
Genesis 1:27 “So God created man in His OWN IMAGE; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 “Or do you not know that YOUR BODY is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have FROM GOD, and YOU ARE NOT YOUR OWN? For you were bought at a price; therefore GLORIFY GOD IN YOUR BODY AND YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GODS?”
Romans 12:1-2 “I beseech you therefore, brethren, but the mercies of God, that you present your BODIES a living sacrifice, holy acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. And DO NOT BE CONFORMED TO THIS WORLD, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Psalm 139:13-16 “13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.”
Psalm 100:3 “Know that the Lord, He is God; IT IS HE WHO HAS MADE US, and not we ourselves; WE ARE HIS PEOPLE and the sheep of His pasture.”
Example of Religious Exemption Letter from a Nurse who obtained an exemption:
Once I was naïve and believed wholeheartedly in scientific achievements with unbounding faith. I believed others to be good-hearted, many God-fearing. I believed in “do no harm”. After my children were baptized Catholic, I found myself drawn to the faith and began catechism classes and immersed myself as a searcher. As my own personal faith has developed and grown, I have found that growth and change have become a natural part of my own faith. Thus, I remain both a person of faith – and continue to be a searcher. In the past, I have been voluntarily and involuntarily vaccinated for “the greater good.”
Now, my conscience reminds me that my Creator wonderfully and perfectly makes me in His image. I am worthy of being part of the greater good. By my baptism, I am born anew and become a member of God’s people. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Holy Spirit dwells in us, as in a temple. My body is a temple, and I am obliged to regard it as good. I am called to hold it in his honor because God himself created it and will raise it up on the last day. (782, 364) This epiphany has changed the way I live, how I raise my children, and how we practice a holistic approach to natural healing.
In paragraph 159 of the Catechism, “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God despite himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.” (Gaudium et Spes 36 § 1) The forced vaccination conflicts with my faith and freedom because I believe in the Lord, the giver of Life, who provides for the natural healing of our human bodies. I do not believe our merciful God intended for us to poison our earthly bodies with synthetic substances. Man is made of body and soul in unity. I can no longer morally chance potential adverse reactions due to my actions when my human body and spiritual soul are intended to become a temple of the Spirit. (364) I understand that I am a gift from God, like all His children, with an obligation to respect and honor this temporary vessel until He calls me home. “Freedom makes man responsible for his acts to the extent that they are voluntary.” (Catholic Church, 1734).
Mandating a practice that I feel has the potential to cause harm to my earthly body is infringing on my freedom and condemning me by acting against my moral conscience (1778, 1790). “Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. The right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person. This right must be recognized and protected by civil authority within the limits of the common good and public order.” (1738; Cf. Dignitatis Humanae 2 § 7) Man has the right to act in conscience and freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.” (1782, Dignitatis Humanae 3 § 2)
With these references from a regarded religious source, I am requesting a religious exemption to the mandated influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. My understanding of the policy is I may be granted accommodations as outlined by the Mandatory Influenza Vaccination Procedure. In years past, this accommodation has been wearing a mask. We are presently mandated to wear a mask while on campus; thus, my religious objection will not be an issue of discrimination nor reveal any medically sensitive information.
– The employer does not need a letter from a pastor or other clergy member. If they ask, tell them that is not required by law.
– This letter focuses mainly on Covid vaccines as all use aborted fetal cells. Not all other vaccines do not.
Consider language in your religious exemption letter pertaining to not medicating healthy bodies as that should cover other vaccines also.
– Some letters include language about the body being the temple of God. I did not include that as I feel that most people do things all the time that violate this – such as smoke, drink, get cosmetic surgery, etc. In my opinion, that opens the door to a challenge.
We Have A Constitutional Right To Following Our Religious Convictions Regarding Our Bodies
Conscience protections apply to health care providers who refuse to perform, accommodate, or assist with certain health care services on religious or moral grounds. Federal statutes protect health care provider conscience rights and prohibit recipients of certain federal funds from discriminating against health care providers who refuse to participate in these services based on moral objections or religious beliefs. Those statutes are listed below.
Example of Letter Citing Constitutional and Federal Statutes:
<Your firmly held moral conviction against vaccination listed here>
On this basis, as the above-referenced immunization requirements violate my right to freely exercise my religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of The United States of America, I am asserting my rights to an exemption from (Governing Authority Name) __________________ immunization requirements. I qualify for this exemption based on the following: 1) First Amendment of the United States Constitution 2) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (42 U.S. Code § 2000e) prohibits discrimination against a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. As enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Title VII requires employers to reasonably accommodate an employee’s sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. For religious accommodation request, according to the EEOC’s COVID-19 guidance, employers should ordinarily, assume that an employee’s request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. EEOC guidance also reminds employers that the ADA prohibits employers from both disclosing that an employee is receiving a reasonable accommodation and retaliating against an employee for requesting an accommodation. Failure to uphold 42 U.S. Code § 2000e and any attempt to coerce an individual to get the Covid-19 the vaccine is a violation of federal law and may be met with legal action.
FETAL CELL USE (Some lawyers have advised not using this as your primary objection for if they create vaccines that aren’t abortion tainted you could lose your exemption)
Below is a compilation of Synodal Statements, Medical Studies, Professional Dissertations, and Hierarchical and Monastic Statements which either forbid totally or recommend against receiving the COVID-19 Vaccine:
Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church [1]
The Social Life Document of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is the largest Orthodox Jurisdiction on Earth, defines the absolute inadmissibility of medicines prepared using fetal therapy.
“The Church believes it to be definitely inadmissible to use the methods of so-called foetal therapy, in which the human foetus on various stages of its development is aborted and used in attempts to treat various diseases and to “rejuvenate” an organism. Denouncing abortion as a cardinal sin, the Church cannot find any justification for it either even if someone may possibly benefit from the destruction of a conceived human life. Contributing inevitably to ever wider spread and commercialization of abortion, this practice (even if its still hypothetical effectiveness could be proved scientifically) presents an example of glaring immorality and is criminal.”
This command is in point XII 7 of the Social Life Document. This document defines, as indicated by the name, appropriate Orthodox Christian living in as many aspects of society as is enumerated. Because of point XII 7, it would be a violation of my faith to receive the following coronavirus vaccines:
Moderna – The Moderna Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is cited by the vaccine researchers Kizzmekia S. Corbett, Darin K. Edwards, and Sarah R. Leist [4].
Sputnik V – The Sputnik V Vaccine cites their manufacturers as using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293 [6][7].
AstraZeneca – AstraZeneca was developed using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is also contained in documents permitting its emergency use in the United Kingdom [8].
Vaxart – Vaxart was produced with the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [9].
Altimmune – The Altimmune vaccine was produced and developed with the abortion-derived cell line PER.C6. This information is recorded by Altimmune’s own Clinical Trial Protocol [10]. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2].
COVAXX and United Biomedical – COVAXX was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [11].
Novavax – The Novavax Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by researches at ScienceMag [13].
University of Pittsburgh “PittCoVacc” – PittCoVacc was produced with the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by EBioMedicine at the Lancet [14].
Walter Reed Army Institute – The Walter Reed Vaccine was produced with the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [15].
Sanofi Pasteur and Translate Bio – The Sanofi Vaccine was developed and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the vaccine researchers at NPJ Vaccines [16].
Inovio Pharmeceuticals – The Inovio Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by researches at ScienceMag [17].
Arcturus Therapeutics – The Arcturus Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [18].
Imperial College London – The Imperial College Vaccine was developed and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [19].
Providence Therapeutics – The Providence Vaccine was developed and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [20].
CoronaVac – CoronoVac was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by researches at ScienceMag [21].
CanSino Biologics – The CanSino Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by researches at BioSpace [22].
ImmunityBio and NantKwest – The ImmunityBio Vaccine was developed, produced, and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [23].
Institut Pasteur and Themis and Merck – The Institut Pasteur Vaccine was developed and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America [24].
Rega Institute, KU Leuven – The Rega Vaccine protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Global Virus Network [25].
Anhui Zhifei – The Anhui Zhifei Vaccine was developed and protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cell Press Journal [26].
Clover Biopharmeceuticals – The Clover Vaccine was protein tested using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is recorded by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory [27].
The same Social Life Document also states “The transplantation of organs from a living donor can be based only on the voluntary self-sacrifice for the sake of another’s life. In this case, the consent to explantation (removal of an organ) becomes a manifestation of love and compassion. However, a potential donor should be fully informed about possible consequences of the explanation of his organ for his health. The explanation that presents an immediate threat to the life of a donor is morally inadmissible.”
This is from the same point, XII 7, and therein it condemns the harvesting of biological material from a subject without their total informed consent. This condemns the usage of any vaccines manufactured utilizing stolen organs, thereby also condemning the CureVac Vaccine because it was protein tested on HeLa cells, which were harvested from an African American mother of five in 1951 without her knowledge or consent. This information is enumerated by the Lozier Institute [2]. This information is accounted by John Hopkin’s Magazine [28].
Greek Orthodox Press Release on “The Cloning of Embryonic Cells” [29]
The Greek Orthodox Church, which is the second in order among the non-patriarchal Autocephalous Jurisdictions, declared “Our Church expresses its categorical opposition to conducting experiments on human embryonic cells.” This is found in the 17.8.2000 Press Release on Embryo Cell Cloning. It further declares in the same Press Release that “the effort to improve life can not pass through the destruction of millions of human beings of embryonic age.”
This absolutely condemns the bulk of the already above-mentioned Vaccines which are the product of testing on cells harvested from aborted fetuses. This would make it a contradiction to my Orthodox faith to receive those vaccines even if said vaccines genuinely benefited me.
Romanian Orthodox Church Statement on “The Transplant of Organs” [30]
The Romanian Orthodox Church, which is fourth in the order of junior Patriarchates, lists mandatory principles for the moral use of human organs and tissues, and states: “Because the extraction of organs implies the consent of the donor, extraction of tissues from an embryo is inconceivable given the fact that although alive, this one cannot give its consent.”
On this basis, the Romanian Orthodox Church condemns all medical work profiting from the harvesting of cells from a embryo, or, in fact, any medical work profiting from the harvesting of cells from a non-consenting individual. This statement alone condemns all the above-mentioned vaccines on the basis that they come from either an aborted fetus or a non-consenting individual; in the vast majority of cases, these vaccines are condemned by both qualifications.
Also mentioned in this Statement in the Church’s view of death. The Church declares that “From a Christian point of view, death has two acceptances:
Man’s moving away from God through sin (death that can be temporary or eternal, according to the seriousness of the sin, repentance or its absence);
The physical death – materialized through the separation of the soul from the body. All Christian effort is to get rid of the eternal death through the dynamic communion with God in Christ, through the Holy Spirit. This fact does not exclude the care for the conditions, moment and way of separating the soul from the body.”
I am of the opinion that receiving the vaccines mentioned above would be participating in the sin of abortion, thereby resulting in my spiritual death. While neither death is desirable, the Church has since antiquity declared that spiritual death is magnitudes less desirable than physical death because spiritual death results in the eternal suffering of our souls, as is declared in Revelation 21:8 – “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” And again in Revelation 20:14 – “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.”
Inter-Church declaration by Archbishop Makarios [31]
Archbishop Makarios is a hierarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the First Throned Patriarchate of the Orthodox Church. He worked with other religious officials of other churches to compose an InterChurch statement condemning the AstraZeneca Vaccine on the basis that it was developed using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. On this basis, most of the above-mentioned vaccines are condemned because of their usage of HEK-293 in the development or testing of their vaccines.
Moldovan Orthodox Church Declaration On The Threat Of COVID Vaccines [32]
The Moldovan Orthodox Church, which is a self-ruling jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church, declared that the COVID Vaccines are a microchipping threat for faithful Christians.
In the statement, the Church states that “it must be said that vaccination carries the risk of microchipping or introducing foreign devices into the human body. The public in many European countries is protesting against mandatory vaccination, especially against the COVID-19 vaccine, because it considers it to be the way in which the world anti-Christ system wants to introduce microchips into people’s bodies to control them…”
The Synod says affirmatively that the Vaccine is a microchipping threat and acknowledges that the public are concerned that there are greater forces governing the world which are using vaccines and microchips in order to control them in a scheme in service of the anti-Christ.
I do not know if the vaccine is a microchipping threat, nor do I know if greater forces are serving the anti-Christ using the vaccines, however I DO know that these are my spiritual shepherds and that they have been appointed as pastors of the Orthodox Christian flock due to their wisdom and diligence. They are wiser than I am, and I will trust this overwhelming opposition to the vaccine by the hierarchs of my Church. Therefore, I oppose the vaccine as a threat to me, and would like to request that they are not mandated so that I am not of any potential risk.
Georgian Orthodox Synod On The Necessity Of Vaccination Being A Free Choice And Not Compulsory [33]
The Georgian Orthodox Church, which is the second in the order of Junior Patriarchates, made a Synodal Statement concerning the vaccine. In the Synodal Statement, they declare “We welcome the fact that the Covid-Pandemic vaccination process has been declared voluntary and not mandatory; This is especially important today, when the vaccine is newly developed and health professionals in different countries have different opinions about it.”
The Georgian Church acknowledges that the different opinions are valid enough to be such a concern that the vaccines should not be compulsory and notes that this is “especially important.” I also believe that this is especially important, and I believe this would be a contradiction of my Orthodox faith and thereby should not be mandatory.
Metropolitan Saba of Khoni Against The COVID Vaccine [34]
As a Bishop of the Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Saba is one of the highest authorities concerning Orthodox Christian living. He has voiced extreme opposition to the vaccine.
He states “today’s virus, it is a means in the hands of the devil, to bring people under its influence,” and “there will come a time when a vaccine will be offered to humanity, to humans, which will serve not so much the virus, but the enslavement of humans, the management of humans, the subjugation of humans, and it will become one of the most important tools in the hands of the devil.”
He speaks of the danger of the vaccine, saying that it is a method of controlling the population, much less so than it will be for the management of any virus. As one who is charged with taking care of the Orthodox Christian flock, I take note of his warnings against the vaccine and acknowledge it alongside the warnings of many other Bishops, Elders, and Synods. I cannot, in good conscience, receive the vaccine as I see it as a threat to me, both spiritually and physically. My faith already forbids the COVID Vaccine.
Bishop Spiridon of Skhalta Against The COVID Vaccine [35]
Bishop Spiridon warns against the COVID Vaccine, saying that it is being created by evildoers. This is not difficult to believe, at least in an American context, given that Big Pharma is notorious for its corruption, and the primary supporters of the distribution of the vaccines are the unelected elites of society and the mainstream media.
“If a murderer, a maniac brings you medicine, will you drink it?” I do not trust. I will not bring home the medicine brought by them.”
“I am personally convinced that this is the devil’s trap! – These people will not give you any medicine,”
Bishop Spiridon warns that the elites are functioning as agents of the devil to present the vaccine as a trap. This implicates, not just vaccines produced with aborted fetal cells, but ALL vaccines against coronavirus. This greatly concerns me, and I feel my readiness and functionality will be hindered if under any obligation to receive a vaccine against coronavirus.
In the Orthodox Church, exceptionally holy people are canonized as Saints. A canonization indicates the Church’s recognition that a person has already been received into the Kingdom of Heaven. These people have encountered God in a way not many people can comprehend, reaching heights of humility and divinization that the average man may never experience. Saint Paisios, in particular, lived such a holy life on earth that God bestowed upon him the gift of foresight, that is to say, he could spiritually warn with accuracy about the future. In one of his books, entitled “Spiritual Counsels II: Spiritual Awakening,” Saint Paisios displays his gift of foresight by predicting that a new vaccine (“new” relative to the time when he was alive) would be created to combat a new disease which will bear the Mark of the Beast on those who take it voluntarily.
“And now a vaccine has been developed to combat a new disease, which will be obligatory and those taking it will be marked.”
“Later on, anyone who is not marked with the number 666 will not be able to either buy or sell, to get a loan, to get a job, and so forth.”
Saint Paisios is eerily predicting many things which I have noticed, including the inexplicable push to mandate the vaccine in all areas of life. One such area is this line of work, which is the entire reason I have to request a religious exemption in the first place. This is the mindset behind the “Vaccine Passports” which some people are suggesting should be used as a prerequisite for flight by commercial plane, and some countries are using as prerequisite for any form of immigration. Saint Paisios saw a coming vaccine as the Mark of the Beast, bearing the number of his name: 666. I am aware of the Bible’s condemnation of those who bear his number, as all who take the Mark will be beyond salvation due to them having blasphemed the Holy Spirit by doing so. Whether or not the COVID Vaccine is the vaccine Saint Paisios warned about, I do not know, but I do know that there are many similarities between his foreseen vaccine and the COVID Vaccine. In order that I am not of any threat of taking the Mark of the Beast, I am requesting an exemption to the mandate of the COVID Vaccine.
In the Orthodox Church, the highest accessible spiritual states are found in monasticism. Most canonized Saints are monks, and monks are considered the foremost spiritual fathers for Orthodox Christians. This is further demonstrated by the fact that the Spiritual Center of the Orthodox Church is Mount Athos, which as a monastic republic, composed exclusively of monks. The Holy Mountain is held in high regard as some of our greatest guides come from there. Therefore, it is if considerable note that the abbot of Karakallou Monastery on Mount Athos felt it necessary to make a video to inform Orthodox Christians around the world about the dangers of the COVID Vaccine.
Archimandrite Philotheos says “We sense that the coming of this pandemic was no accident, and in fact, that it was manufactured. And then came the vaccine, supposedly ‘to suppress the pandemic,’ but we sense that this is all being directed, is artificial, in order to achieve what they want—their ultimate purpose,”
“And we can see in the way they are now imposing the vaccine that the dark forces have their ultimate goal. We have also been prepared for this by the Revelation of St. John the Evangelist, and we have been warned by the Apostolic Fathers who speak of the days of the Antichrist,”
“They abolish democracy, abolish human rights, abolish so many things these days. How do they reconcile all this? Under the pretext, of course, of the pandemic that they have produced,”
Archimandrite Philotheos is in a position unlike Saint Paisios described before, in that he inhabits the world while this Vaccine is conquering the world. He sees it as an effort by higher authorities and elites to abolish human rights for the purpose of subjugating mankind to prepare for the antiChrist. He says this vaccine is prepare humanity to be sealed in the future, meaning the Mark of the Beast. This is unacceptable for an Orthodox Christian, as the Mark of the Beast cannot be repented of. I absolutely cannot be at threat of the Mark.
Another Abbot of the Holy Mountain, from a different monastery, speaks against the COVID Vaccine. This is all weighing heavily on the vaccine. Elder Parthenius is the abbot of Saint Paul’s Monastery, and here he speaks against the vaccine saying that we ought the Lord’s Will far sooner than a man-made solution. We ought to pray against the virus as “Our hope is that whoever trusts in God will not be ashamed. We must rely not on our own strength, but on the mercy and love of God.”
Elder Parthenius refuses to bless anyone to receive the vaccine as it lines up too closely with what is written in Revelation 13. By its fruits we shall know it, and although the vaccine doesn’t perfectly align with Revelation 13, the similarities should strike us as notable.
Elder Efthymios is another Athonite monk who speaks about the suspicious nature of the vaccine. He firstly says “Those who do not want to be vaccinated, no one should and does not have the right to force them to be vaccinated in any way.” He goes on to say that the vaccine was mad obligatory in some areas before it was ever even manufactured. “There is a cure,” he says, “but some do not want it.” The cure he speaks about is the Body and Blood of Christ. This is a greater vaccine than anything created by mankind. “The vaccine is not a cure,” he notes as being confirmed by Nobel Prize-winning French Scientist Luc Antoine Montagnier. Elder Efthymios speculates that if the vaccine were genuinely and helpful, it would not need all this propaganda. Therefore there is reasonable suspicion of the vaccine, and it is within all appropriate logic to avoid it.
Metropolitan Seraphim of Kythira Against the Vaccine [42][43]
Metropolitan Seraphim is the bishop of the Church of Cyprus, the first in the order of non-patriarchal Autocephalous Jurisdictions in the Orthodox Church. He has condemned the vaccines harshly for being the products of aborted fetal cells. Citing information from Italy, he notes that “the vaccine is made from aborted fetuses,” saying that it is impossible for the Orthodox to accept such a thing even if it is in the best economic interests of the people because what matters more than the economy is proper enforcement of morality.
I cannot accept a vaccine that results from the murder of babies, and therefore am requesting an exemption to the vaccine so that I do not participate in this grave sin.
Father Alexander Demonstrates the Moral Peril of the COVID Vaccine [44]
Father Alexander is a highly respected academic, author, and speaker. He served as an Orthodox Chaplain in the United States Army for over 24 years, achieving the rank of Colonel. He also served as a Dean and Professor of Moral Theology Emeritus at Holy Trinity Seminary. In light of his impressive resume, he would unquestionably support an exemption for Orthodox Christian receiving the COVID Vaccine. He says “We must reject, on moral grounds, all COVID-19 vaccines that have any connection to aborted preborn baby cells.” This condemns practically every available COVID Vaccine, and surely you cannot suppose that one violates their own moral codes for the sake of a negligibly beneficial vaccine? “According to traditional Orthodox moral theology (as opposed to revisionist variations so common today), certain actions (“means” to “ends”) are objectively, intrinsically evil under any “circumstances”—most notably, abortion, rape, incest, child abuse, physical torture, and deliberate targeting of non-combatants in war.” Fr Alexander knows the price that must be paid for anyone who participates in this grave evils, even if that evil is FDA Approved.
Saint Nikephoros the Leper Reveals the True Cure [45]
Saint Nikephoros was a monk granted the rank of the Angelic Schema, the highest order of monks in the Orthodox Church. For the majority of his life, he suffered from leprosy. In his time, he was unable to obtain medicine for the disease. He lived among lepers so as to not spread the disease among the healthy. As he progressed in his life and grew in his holiness, he came to a point where the disease would not spread to the healthy anymore. He became a vessel for blessings and good things, rather than a vector of death. He was granted the gift from God to return to the earth after his death to warn the faithful about the coronavirus pandemic. Multiple times he appeared to faithful Orthodox Christians in the Balkans. Saint Nikephoros revealed the truth: “There is a cure and this is the Holy Communion. There’s also a herb to drink, it’s thyme, it kills viruses. And in any case, be sure to visit the house of God at this difficult time, because there is no contagion there and no one can be infected.” He has given us the knowledge of better and more natural treatment, not one from the labs of men. The Holy Eucharist is the cure to COVID-19, and the disease can be treated with thyme. As one who suffered from life-altering diseases, he knows it like no other. As one among the highest order of monks, he knows that the House of God CANNOT contain an infection that harms the faithful. A person who is received validly into the Orthodox Church is the only one allowed to partake of the Body and Blood of Christ for his sanctification. As an Orthodox Christian, I can trust that I will receive the appropriate care from God by going into the temple of the Lord and participating in the regular Liturgical Cycle. Therefore there is no need to fear if I will catch the disease without a vaccine.
All of the above is a confirmation that it is not only my right to not be subject to the COVID Vaccine, but my duty as an Orthodox Christian. It is contradictory to the Orthodox faith no matter how you look at it. It cannot be justified and may even lead to our eternal spiritual disaster. It is for these reasons that I am requesting, through the appropriate channels, an exemption to the mandate to receive the COVID Vaccine.
The following are my sources for why it is a violation of my Orthodox Faith to receive at this time a COVID Vaccine:
Our local media was so concerned that people might hear from a minority, they tried to spread the word that the memorial/vigil for those who have been injured or killed from the jab has been canceled. That was a lie. These talking heads don’t want you to know about these numbers and hear from the victims themselves.
This event was well attended by compassionate individuals who wanted to honor the pain and suffering of others. And even with threats from a representative of the Anne Frank Memorial to call the police and several disrespectful hecklers, the event proceeded peacefully.
This event is NOT a protest. This is a memorial designed to honor the voice of those who are trying to speak out but are being intentionally silenced and ridiculed by much of the public. We were heckled. How IRONIC that it was a Human Rights Memorial representative was disruptive and threatened to call the police on this peaceful gathering.
a visual display created by local high schoolers. Each flower represents 100 lives lost or injured by the vaccine.
HFI hosted an event in Boise that the city attempted to silence with threats of calling the police. Truth prevailed!! We hosted an event ON PUBLIC PROPERTY that backs to the Human Rights Memorial. This event was to honor those who suffered injury and death.
We gathered today because of tragedy. Individuals who did what we have all be told to do, for our own safety and for the benefit of others, suffered disastrous results. Children are now without their mother, a man without the ability to walk. Teens and formerly healthy young adults now have lifelong heart conditions. Individuals are dead and damaged by an experimental medical product. And our communities and cities, instead of providing support and compassion have ignored – worse yet, ridiculed these families for speaking bout the injury they suffered.
In fact, we are outside the Human Rights Memorial because the city of Boise and those who maintain the Human Rights Memorial felt that the voices of the minority shouldn’t be heard. Those quotes you read in the memorial are there because someone felt it significant to hear from the victims and to learn from the tragedy.
How ironic Boise and those who manage the Human Rights Memorial are attempting to discriminate and silence us today. Threats to call the police in addition to having their volunteers stand behind the speakers, who have suffered from loss and permanent injury, in an attempt to mock them.
We came to acknowledge that more than 15,000 deaths nationwide have been reported. To give voice to the almost 21,000 people who are now struggling to live life with a permanent disability and the 12,000 whose hearts went from healthy to diseased After their jab. To all those who have said we shouldn’t have a memorial like this because there are 2000 Idahoans who died from COVID In the past 18 months. We want to also recognize there have been 2000 who reported having suffered from vaccine reactions in the past 9 months.
Honoring the suffering and pain of one individual does NOT deny the pain of another. There is enough pain to go around- what we are lacking is compassion.
HFI Response to those who think a memorial for the victims of vaccines is inappropriate
Those who have suffered Injury because of COVID vaccines are suffering pain AND RIDICULE. Today, I hope they felt honored. Let them know they are seen, they are heard, they are believed. #choosecompassion#Respect#solidarity
Video will be provided soon.
One flower represents 100 individuals whose hearts went from healthy to diseased after the shot.Each lavender rose represents 100 people who now have to live with a permanent disability. The small flowers in the vase represent 100 preborn children who died after their pregnant moms received the vaccine.Data for 9/17
one week increased of death, injury and suffering from the vaccine
We pray that those who are suffering and injured know that they are seen. heard. believed.
Saturday, September 25, 2021, 10:00 a.m. just BEHIND the Anne Frank Memorial on the grass by the greenbelt Health Freedom Idaho hosted speakers who have suffered injury from the vaccine. With a beautiful mural created by local high school students to help us visualize the actual number of lives that are being affected by the vaccine itself.
We will honor the victims with a moment of silence and the opportunity for silent prayer.
Our local media was so concerned that people might hear from a minority, they tried to spread the word that the memorial/vigil for those who have been injured or killed from the jab has been canceled. That was a lie. These talking heads don’t want you to know about these numbers and hear from the victims themselves.
This event was well attended by compassionate individuals who wanted to honor the pain and suffering of others. And even with threats from a representative of the Anne Frank Memorial to call the police and several disrespectful hecklers, the event proceeded peacefully.
a visual display created by local high schoolers. Each flower represents 100 lives lost or injured by the vaccine.
HFI hosted an event in Boise that the city and/or those who maintain the Human Rights Memorial attempted to silence with threats of calling the police. Truth prevailed!! We hosted an event ON PUBLIC PROPERTY that backs to the Human Rights Memorial. This event was to honor those who suffered injury and death, not a protest.
We gathered today because of tragedy. Individuals who did what we have all be told to do, for our own safety and for the benefit of others, suffered disastrous results. Children are now without their mother, a man without the ability to walk. Teens and formerly healthy young adults now have lifelong heart conditions. Individuals are dead and damaged by an experimental medical product. And our communities and cities, instead of providing support and compassion have ignored – worse yet, ridiculed these families for speaking bout the injury they suffered.
In fact, we are outside the Human Rights Memorial because the city of Boise and those who maintain the Human Rights Memorial felt that the voices of the minority shouldn’t be heard. Those quotes you read in the memorial are there because someone felt it significant to hear from the victims and to learn from the tragedy.
How ironic Boise and those who manage the Human Rights Memorial are attempting to discriminate and silence us today. Threats to call the police. Having their volunteers stand behind the speakers who have suffered from loss and permanent injury, in an attempt to mock them.
We came to acknowledge that more than 15,000 deaths nationwide have been reported. To give voice to the almost 21,000 people who are now struggling to live life with a permanent disability and the 12,000 whose hearts went from healthy to diseased After their jab. To all those who have said we shouldn’t have a memorial like this because there are 2000 Idahoans who died from COVID In the past 18 months. We want to also recognize there have been 2000 who reported having suffered from vaccine reactions in the past 9 months.
Honoring the suffering and pain of one individual does NOT deny the pain of another. There is enough pain to go around- what we are lacking is compassion.
HFI RESPONSE TO THOSE WHO THINK A MEMORIAL FOR THE VICTIMS OF VACCINES IS INAPPROPRIATE
Those who have suffered Injury because of COVID vaccines are suffering pain AND RIDICULE. Today, I hope they felt honored. Let them know they are seen, they are heard, they are believed. #choosecompassion#Respect#solidarity
One flower represents 100 individuals whose hearts went from healthy to diseased after the shot.Each lavender rose represents 100 people who now have to live with a permanent disability. The small flowers in the vase represent 100 preborn children who died after their pregnant moms received the vaccine.Data for 9/17one week increased of death, injury and suffering from the vaccine
This event is NOT a protest. This is a memorial designed to honor the voice of those who are trying to speak out but are being intentionally silenced and ridiculed by much of the public.
We pray that those who are suffering and injured know that they are seen. heard. believed.
Several major Idaho employers, including St. Luke’s, St. Alphonsus, and Primary Care have stated that they will now discriminate based on their employees’ personal health choices. This is wrong and needs to be made explicitly illegal. The Governor of Idaho protected the jobs of State Employees from being affected by their COVID-19 vaccination status with Executive Order 2021-04, but this does nothing to protect those who work for someone other than the State of Idaho. No one should be forced to choose between keeping their job and undergoing a medical procedure that violates their bodily autonomy, especially one which lacks long-term data, has inherent risk, and is still only under experimental use authorization.
WE THE PEOPLE need to stand side by side with our healthcare professionals and NOT permit their employers to coerce them into vaccine mandates! Now more than ever, we need to rise up and say NO!
Here’s what you can do:
1. VACCINE EXEMPTIONS IN IDAHO LAW ARE SPECIFIC FOR CHILDREN. The medical, philosophical, and religious exemptions we talk about all the time through HFI are only applicable to minor children, and only for school and daycare attendance.
2. VACCINE EXEMPTIONS SHOULD EXIST IN YOUR WORKPLACE. Look into any possible exemption for adults with their employers are ones that may or may not be available through any given company. Please inquire with your employer. (Information regarding moral/religious exemption) Utilize the resources below.
3. UNITE! You are strong, especially together. You have the God-given right to your bodily autonomy, and you have strength in numbers. Talk to each other. Here’s a Facebook group for healthcare workers: https://www.facebook.com/groups/377518550406136/
TELEGRAM RESOURCE: #STOPTHEMANDATE
4. RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE: For detailed information about how to write a legally sound statement of religious beliefs opposed to immunizations, see the Vaccine Rights Manuals. This applies to exemptions for employees (civilian and military), student clinical work, immigration, and daycare and school exemptions in a couple of states. Free Printable Notice to Employer Letter found at Health Freedom Defense, Detailed Manual for purchase at Alan Phillips at Vaccine Rights.com, The Healthy American also has a how-to-write vaccine exemption material. Pacific Justice Institute has a 5 page write-up including quotes from the CDC about the inability of employers to mandate vaccines under EUA.
Questions and Answers on the Covid-19 Vaccine Pacific Justice Institute July 2, 2021 Question: Can my employer order me to be vaccinated against Covid (also referred to as COVID-19, novel coronavirus or SARS-CoV-2) and can they threaten to fire me if I do not comply? Answer: First, no one can force you to take the Covid vaccine, because it has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The vaccine is currently being administered under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) because the vaccines were not studied for a sufficient time to ensure there are no long-term side effects. There are a number of authorities and resources you can cite that show you cannot be forced to take a vaccine. Consider the following four examples:
The EUA itself, 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3, requires “. . . Individuals to whom the product is administered are informed— of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product . . .”1
Each person who is about to receive a Covid vaccine is given a fact sheet, which states in part: “WHAT IF I DECIDE NOT TO GET THE (insert drug company name) COVID-19 VACCINE? It is your choice to receive or not receive the (insert drug company name) COVID-19 Vaccine. Should you decide not to receive it, it will not change your standard medical care.”2
In the 2004 case of Doe v. Rumsfeld, 3 plaintiffs challenged the government’s Anthrax Vaccination Immunization Program (AVIP), because anthrax vaccine adsorbed (AVA) had never been approved by the FDA as a safe and effective drug for protection against inhalation anthrax. Yet the government was forcing military personnel to take the vaccine. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an injunction 1 See, 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies. Subsection (e)(1)(A)(ii) 2 See, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/eua/index.html. 3 Doe v. Rumsfeld, 341 F. Supp. 2d 1, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21668. visit Pacific Justice Institute to download your complete copy.
Print/Forward this Letter from Attorney from American Frontline Doctors to Saint Alphonsus Regarding Vaccine Mandates. Download it below.
5. USE THE ‘NOTICE TO THE EMPLOYER‘ PROVIDED BY HEALTH FREEDOM DEFENSE Health Freedom Defense has a one-page notice that clearly delineates that a COVID VACCINE MANDATE is in violation of the federal statute. Health Freedom Defense Fund can send a cease and desist letter and possibly initiate further legal action. In addition Contact Health Freedom Defense regarding your situation. Submit your information including your explanation of the situation, the company name and address, the name of the CEO of the company, and his or her email address can be emailed to info@healthfreedomdefense.org.
7. SHARE YOUR SITUATION WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS Let your representatives in the government know how this mandate is affecting your employment, livelihood, and bodily autonomy. Explain the discrimination and ask for them to intercede. We also ask that you include HFI in your correspondence so that we can have a collection of correspondence to share with liberty-minded legislators and legal teams that are working to support freedom.
Have you been discriminated against at work because of your decision to take the shot or not? Has your place of employment forced you to wear a mask or risk losing your job? If so, please share your story or affidavit with the email below. Please include your first name, phone number, and zip code. nomorevaccinationdiscrimination@protonmail.com
Contact Governor Brad Little. Email: governor@gov.idaho.gov State Capitol PO Box 83720 Boise, ID, 83720. Phone Number: 208-334-2100
Contact the Speaker of the House: Scott Bedke (R) District 27. (208) 332-1111. SBedke@house.idaho.gov
8. ASK FRIENDS AND FAMILY TO SUPPORT YOU. Have friends and family correspond with their legislators, the Governor, and the Speaker of the House, and your employer about the fact that as patients they want the healthcare staff to have bodily autonomy.
9. JOIN US as WE STAND IN PROTEST TO VACCINE MANDATES FOR OUR HEALTHCARE WORKERS hosted by American Frontline Doctors and Health Freedom Idaho JULY 19, 2021 Location: St. Lukes on Eagle Road in Meridian 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm
Each one of us must take a stand for sovereignty and bodily autonomy CITIZENS WEAR ROYAL BLUE HOSPITAL STAFF/EMPLOYEES WEAR BLUE SCRUBS
10. PRAY! If you are a praying individual NOW would be the time to get on your knees and pray for wisdom and strength for our healthcare workers and other employees who are faced with what could be a life/death job/termination decision for their families. Prayers for our employers, the business owners, government officials, and leaders in the community to make the right decision to protect liberty, bodily sovereignty and to protect the rights of individuals to make their own personal healthcare choices without coercion.
Your right to bodily autonomy is a God-given right protected by our Federal Statues, Idaho Constitution, and numberous Idaho laws.
Federal statutes: VACCINE UNDER EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION.
“What people don’t understand is that every single one of those products was issued under something called an Emergency Use Authorization. It is a Federal Code under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which grants the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to grant the EUAs. The EUA statute specifically says, “Individuals to whom the product is administered are informed that the Secretary has authorized the EUA. They must be informed of the known and potential benefits and risks of such use and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown. Most importantly, of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.” – Interview with Leslie Manookian, Health Freedom Defense
Regarding compulsory COVID-19 requirement imposed upon an employee violates federal law. 1 Title 21, Section 360bbb-3 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FD&C Act”) vests the Secretary of Health and Human Services with the permissive authority to grant Emergency Use Authorizations (“EUAs”). However, the statute requires that: individuals to whom the product is administered are informed— (I) that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product; (II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and (III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.
The Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title I of ADA Title I of the ADA applies to private employers with 15 or more employees. It also applies to state and local government employers, employment agencies, and labor unions.
All nondiscrimination standards under Title I of the ADA also apply to federal agencies under Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which enforces these federal civil rights laws in employment, has issued guidance on COVID-19 and vaccination policies. The Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are relevant to employers or lawmakers crafting vaccination requirements. EEOC provides examples of potential reasonable accommodations. Examples of a “reasonable accommodation” for employees who cannot comply with a vaccine mandate because of a disability; religious belief, practice or observance; or pregnancy include requiring the unvaccinated employee to:
Wear a face mask at work
Work at a social distance from co-workers or non-employees
Idaho Constitution Art 1 Sec 4: “The liberty of conscience hereby secured…” and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege, or capacity on account of his religious opinions; IDAHO STATUTE PROTECTS HEALTHCARE WORKERS FROM DISCRIMINATION.
LEGISLATURE.IDAHO.GOVSection 18-611FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS 18-611 (3) Employers of health care professionals shall reasonably accommodate the conscience rights of their employees as provided in this section, upon advanced written notification by the employee. Such notice shall suffice without specification of the reason therefor. It shall be unlawful for any employer to discriminate against any health care professional based upon his or her declining to provide a health care service that violates his or her conscience unless the employer can demonstrate that such accommodation poses an undue hardship.
39-9003 (2) It is hereby declared that the public policy of the state of Idaho, consistent with our constitutionally recognized and inalienable rights of liberty, is that every person within the state of Idaho is and shall be free to choose or decline to choose any mode of securing health care services without penalty or threat of penalty by the federal government of the United States of America. Additional Information and Resources regarding risk, statistics, and the science (that is currently being censored by mainstream media)
Informed Consent
The EUA (emergency use authorization) statute specifically says, “Individuals to whom the product is administered are informed that the Secretary has authorized the EUA. They must be informed of the known and potential benefits and risks of such use and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown. Most importantly, of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”
www.c19vaxreactions.com is a place to network and see others having the same symptoms, that have been injured by this vaccine.
These hospital mandates are likely a death sentence for some of your employees as shown by the table above. Note that over 9,000 deaths have been reported to and compiled into the VAERS system. Have you confirmed which employees have already contracted “the virus” and are now immune?
LIABILITY FREE PRODUCTS
On February 4, 2020, the Secretary of HHS invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness act (PREP Act) and declared COVID-19 to be a public health emergency, warranting liability protection for covered countermeasures, which includes vaccination. If an individual is injured or killed by a COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer cannot be held liable per the PREP Act. The only possible recourse should you or a loved one suffer injury or death is to pursue compensation through the Countermeasure Injury Compensation Program, which has a difficult threshold for proving a relationship between an injury and the vaccine, a short statute of limitations, no avenue for appeals and doesn’t pay damages for pain or suffering.
The liability exempt status for vaccine manufacturers is not new. Pharmaceutical companies have enjoyed their liability-free status for all vaccinations on the CDC schedule since the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. After large numbers of lawsuits were brought forth for injuries and deaths resulting from the DPT vaccine, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to protect pharmaceutical companies from liability specifically for vaccines. No other product or industry is protected from liability for injury and death in this way.
Without any liability, what incentive is there to ensure the vaccine is as safe as possible? Will the employer requiring vaccination be held liable for injury and/or death?
The development of vaccines, using the harvested organs of aborted human beings, violates the moral conviction of many individuals from a variety of religious backgrounds. The fact that vaccines were created on the bodies of aborted babies has never been hidden. Recently the “major religions” leaders have come out saying that injecting yourself for your health protection with a product developed on the bodies of murdered innocent humans is morally acceptable.
RELIGIOUS LEADERS CLAIM ABORTION TAINTED VACCINES ARE MORALLY ACCEPTABLE
It’s hard to believe that organizations/religions that claim to be ‘pro-life’ Focus on the Family, and the Catholic Church are promoting the use of vaccines even with the evidence that aborted human beings were used in the manufacturer and development. They believe that vaccines were created on the bodies of sacrificed innocent human beings and tested on pregnant women, orphans and possibly severely disabled individuals are ‘morally acceptable’ and prudent.Begs the question – is this what Jesus would do?
Coronavirus vaccines developed in the States and globally were made from the cell lines of aborted children — healthy children who were murdered. Most notably, this includes a fetal cell line called HEK-293, from the kidney of a healthy girl aborted in 1972, and PER.C6, from the retina of a healthy boy aborted in 1985. Apparently, these and similar cell lines have been used since the 1960s to manufacture vaccines against rubella, chickenpox, hepatitis A, shingles, hemophilia, rheumatoid arthritis, and cystic fibrosis. (and others)
Interview with John Piper Founder & Teacher, desiringGod.org
Those who believe in a righteous and just God must remember we must each stand before our creator give an account of our own. There will not be an opportunity to hide behind the robes of religious authorities during the righteous judgment of God.
My questions to believers: Can Christians, fearful of viruses, ignore the child sacrifice used to create a technology in order to ‘benefit’ from it? Can the GOD we trust, honor our use of this “medical product” to keep us “healthy”? NO! God will not honor this medical product built on child sacrifice for our protection, it is counter to his holy character!
ISN’T GOD CAPABLE OF PROTECTING US WHILE WE ABSTAIN FROM THE USE OF THESE PRODUCTS DEVELOPED USING CHILD ABUSE, SACRIFICE, AND MURDER?
“God is God. He honors the integrity and principled action that is rooted in his truth and his beauty and his worth, even where the world cannot see the point. We have no idea what explosive effects, in the depths of God’s providence and purposes, our principled action might unleash by God’s grace. “
While the issue of aborted fetal cell line use in vaccine production is now widely discussed, there are few places that document each of these cell lines and the abortions performed to develop them from primary and official sources.
As of 16 May 2020, using mostly primary sources available on the internet, NODECEPTION.ORG documented that at least 181 abortions have been performed to develop fetal cell lines for the manufacturing of vaccines, including the Covid-19 vaccines in development. Those cell lines are documented here.
Research and Development in General
Dr. Stanley Plotkin, in a deposition in January 2018, talks about how 76 aborted fetuses were used to “determine whether or not they could be used to make vaccines.”[5] Recorded disposition https://youtu.be/6D5tz-q_6o8
HEK-293** COVID VACCINE UTILIZES THIS ABORTED FETAL LINE FOR DEVELOPMENT, PRODUCTION AND TESTING M-RNA VACCINE TECHNOLOGIES
In 1972, the cell line Human Embryonic Kidney 293 (HEK-293) was made. [16] At least one abortion was used to get this cell line. In 2020, numerous COVID19 vaccines were developed with HEK-293, including but not limited to, Moderna’s mRNA-1273 COVID19 vaccine which uses the Spike (S) protein. [17] This Spike (S) protein is expressed in HEK-293. [18] The Jenner Institute began developing a COVID19 vaccine using ChAdOx1 technology in 2020. [19] ChAdOx1 was developed using HEK-293 cells. [20] The University of Pittsburgh also developed a COVID-19 vaccine–PittCoVacc, using HEK-293. [21] China’s CanSino Biologics’ Ad5-nCoV also uses HEK-293. [22]
Everyone needs to be personally responsible for their own health and should research the COVID-19 vaccines in development carefully before making a decision whether or not to vaccinate. Children’s Health Defense and the Informed Consent Action Network have been following the science closely and are good resources for everything COVID. They can be followed at https://childrenshealthdefense.org/ and https://www.icandecide.org/covid/.
WI-38 is the cell line created from the lung of a twelve-week-old gestation girl, aborted in 1962 in Sweden. [6] WI stands for Wistar Institute; the number represents the fetal sample. Some fetal samples were taken from the same baby, but WI-1 through WI-25 were 19 different babies. [7] WI-38 is currently used in the following FDA-licensed vaccines: Adenovirus, MMR (MMR-II), MMRV (Proquad). No longer available on the CDC’s excipient list, one can find WI-38 listed in the above vaccine package inserts, which can be found at FDA.gov. (Plotkin testifies about abortion tainted vaccines https://youtu.be/JZnlgNXqVDQ )
RA 27/3 & Rubella Vaccine
In the development of the rubella vaccine in the late 1960s, scientists needed a baby that had rubella to culture the virus. In the FDA’s MMR II vaccine insert in the second paragraph, it lists how the vaccine was prepared “the Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts.”[8] Wistar RA 27/3 stands for Rubella Abortus 27th fetus 3rd tissue explant. [9] The virus strains from this baby were then cultured on WI-38 and tested on orphans in PA. [10] From a journal article about the culturing of rubella in fetal cells, “Observations upon the growth of four strains of rubella virus in human diploid cell strains (HDCS) are reported. Sixty-three cell strains, derived from 29 fetuses by means of an organ culture technique, were studied. All HDCS were susceptible to rubella virus and a chronic infection could be established readily in them.”[11]
The rubella vaccine was then tested on pregnant women “to evaluate the fetal hazard of accidental administration of live rubella vaccine.”[12] 35 babies were aborted in this study.
MRC-5
MRC-5 is the cell line created from the lung of a fourteen-week old gestation boy, aborted in 1966 in England. [13] MRC stands for Medical Research Council Cell Strain 5. [14] At least one abortion was done to develop this line. MRC-5 is currently used in the following FDA-licensed vaccines as listed in the CDC Excipient Table[15] and individual vaccine package inserts found on FDA.gov: DTap-IPV (Quadracel), DTap-IPV/HiB (Pentacel), Hep A (Havrix), Hep A/Hep B (Twinrix), MMRV (Proquad), Rabies (Imovax), Varicella (Varivax), Shingles (Zostavax).
An aborted baby boy was also used as spare parts in the production of vaccines. His designation is MRC-5 – let’s call him Michael. Michael’s 27- year old mother as ‘given an abortion’ for psychological reasons… Did that mother suffering from mental health issues have a choice? Certainly – the baby didn’t.
Albert Sabin references two abortions when he cultivated the polio virus on embryonic tissues in 1936 “A new approach was made by the use of 3- to 4-months-old human embryos, obtained aseptically by Cesarean section. (The authors are indebted to Dr. Lance Monroe, of Bellevue Hospital, for the 2 human embryos used in this investigation.)”[1] Joan Thicke reports five abortions used in his cultivation of polio virus in embryonic tissues: “Virus multiplied successively therefore in cells derived from five different human embryos.”[2] In 1954, Dr. John Franklin Enders, Dr. Thomas Huckle Weller, and Dr. Frederick Chapman Robbins won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for their discovery that polio virus could be cultured in various tissues, including human embryonic tissue. [3] Their research indicates that there must have been a minimum of two abortions as human embryonic tissue “was obtained under sterile precautions at the time of abdominal hysterotomy for therapeutic indications. Embryos of between 12 and 18 weeks gestation have been utilized.”[4]
IMR-90
In 1975, IMR-90 was created “as a replacement for the cell line known as WI-38. The IMR-90 cell line, like WI-38, was derived from lung tissue of a human female embryo following a “therapeutic abortion”. In addition to its use for vaccine production and as a reference cell line for functional studies, it has been used in a variety of other studies, including senescence, cellular transport, and DNA repair.” [23]
PER.C6
In 1985, PER.C6 was aborted in the Netherlands. The retina was harvested from an 18-week old gestation baby, and the fetal cell line was created. [24] PER.C6 is used in the following vaccines that have not yet been licensed by the FDA: HIV, RSV, Ebola, Zika, MERS[25], COVID-19.[26]
This precious life was miscarried at 19 weeks old. His name is Grayson.
WALVAX-2
In 2015, out of nine fetuses, the Walvax-2 cell line was created from a three-month girl fetus aborted in China. “We also assessed the susceptibility of these cells to rabies, hepatitis A, and Varicella viruses. Analysis of virus titers showed the Walvax-2 cells to be equal or superior to MRC-5 cells for cultivating these viruses.”[27]
SUMMARY
To summarize, at least 181 murdered babies have been used in the research and development of vaccines: a minimum of nine in the development of the polio vaccine, 76 in general R&D, 19 in the development of WI-38, 64 in the development of RA 27/3, one in the development of MRC-5, one in the development of HEK-293, one in the development of IMR-90, one in the development of PER.C6, nine in the development of Walvax-2.
[1] Albert B Sabin, Peter K. Olitsky, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Virus in vitro in human embryonic tissue. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1936, 34:357-359 <https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/sabinpolio1936.pdf>
[2] Joan C. Thicke, Darline Duncan, William Wood, A. E. Franklin and A. J. Rhodes; Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Virus in Tissue Culture; Growth of the Lansing Strain in Human Embryonic Tissue, Canadian Journal of Medical Science, Vol. 30, pg 231-245 <https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/PolioThickeCanada.pdf>
[4] Thomas H. Weller, John F. Enders, Studies on the Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Viruses in Tissue Culture: I. The Propagation of Poliomyelitis Viruses in Suspended Cell Cultures of Various Human Tissue; Journal of Immunology 1952;69;645-671 <https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/poliovax1952.pdf>
[9] Plotkin et al, Attenuation of RA 2713 Rubella Virus in WI-38 Human Diploid Cell, American Journal of Diseases of Children, Vol. 118, pp 178-179, August 1969 <https://cogforlife.org/AmJDisChildRA273inWI-38.pdf>
[10] Plotkin et al, Studies of Immunization with living rubella virus; Trials in Children With a Strain Cultured From an Aborted Fetus, American Journal Diseases in Children, Vol 110, pg 381-389, 1965 <https://cogforlife.org/AmJDisChildPlotkinRubellaVirus.pdf>
[11] Hoskins, J.M., Plotkin, S.A. Behaviour of rubella virus in human diploid cell strains I. Growth of virus. Archiv f Virusforschung 21, 283–295 (1967) <https://cogforlife.org/PlotkinNumberOfAbortions.pdf>
[27] Ma B, He LF, Zhang YL, et al. Characteristics and viral propagation properties of a new human diploid cell line, Walvax-2, and its suitability as a candidate cell substrate for vaccine production. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2015;11(4):998‐1009. doi:10.1080/21645515.2015.1009811 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4526020/>
The forced masking of Idaho students violates ID Law. Find out how to support the fight against a school boards’ illegal power grab.
Basin School District No 72 in Boise County, Idaho is enforcing a mask mandate in violation of state law. If students don’t wear a mask, they cannot attend school in person or ride the bus.
The Governor, State Department of Health and Welfare, local health district, county and city have all refused to require face coverings.
Idaho City High School parents and students have filed suit in Boise County, Idaho alleging that this violates parental rights, religious liberties, informed consent and Idaho law and causes grave harm to Idaho students.
Where does the school district get the authority to make law and force health decisions upon students against the wishes of the parents?
Attorney who overturned Little’s stage 1 church order pursues Basin school dist. THIS is the lawsuit Idaho needs.
Please contribute and support the efforts to stop the abuse of Idaho children by elected officials at AllFundIt.com and remember to pray for us. We need and desire wisdom and discretion.
Please help support these courageous parents and students fight back against dictatorial and Marxist school board trustees and superintendents by donating here through AllFundIt or mailing a check or money order to Boyles Law at 217 Cedar Street, Suite 312, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864 PO Box 1242, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864.
December 4 at 5:15 pm the Board of Central District Health will vote to change the current health advisory in place to a health ORDER with enforcement. Instead of “strong recommendations” to wear a face covering, physical distance from others, limit occupancy in businesses, and avoid social gatherings, it would now be an ORDER in all four counties within this health district this includes Ada, Elmore, Valley, and Boise Counties by restricting movement, travel, small businesses and commerce, religious services and in-home gatherings.
Violation of or failure to comply with this Order could constitute a misdemeanor punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both. Idaho Code § 39-419.
Idaho Code 39-414 is vague and very broad in granting powers and duties to this Board. From that section of Code:
To administer and enforce all state and district health laws, regulations, and standards.
To do all things required for the preservation and protection of the public health and preventive health, and such other things delegated by the director of the state department of health and welfare or the director of the department of environmental quality and this shall be the authority for the director(s) to so delegate.
Please note the use of the word ENFORCE. The Health District wants to impose restrictions that are enforced by our law enforcement and criminal legal systems, which typically operate by criminalization and punishment.
Please also note the use of the phrase “DO ALL THINGS required for the preservation and protection of the public health….”
The people within this health district must stand for freedom and demand our rights be respected. We must reject this advice being changed to an order with enforcement.We must stand together and strongly reject our law enforcement officers being turned on the people and ordered to enforce tyranny on us. We must work to change the broad powers vested in this Board, for they are being used to destroy businesses, livelihoods, and our community.
The CDH Board of Health will consider moving the current Public Health Advisory to a Public Health Order for all 4 counties (Ada, Boise, Elmore, & Valley) at a special meeting on Friday, Dec. 4 at 5:15 pm.
Submit Written Comments: If your comments are in response to an agenda item for a specific meeting date, please note that comments must be received 24-hours in advance of the applicable meeting to allow for routing and board member review. All messages will be shared with the Board and included in public record.
Email: boh@cdh.idaho.gov
Mail to: CDH Board of Health, Attn: Russ Duke, 707 N. Armstrong Place, Boise, ID 83704
In-Person: CDH Office, 707 N. Armstrong Place, Boise 83704 | Syringa & White Pine meeting rooms. See important In-Person Meeting Information & Protocol Guidance in the 2020 | Public Meeting Notice section below.
Not only are COVID-19 VACCINE MANUFACTURERS ARE EXEMPT FROM LIABILITY anyone who prescribes, administers, delivers, distributes or dispenses… and manufacturers and distributors of any vaccine used to treat prevent mitigate COVID-19.. shall enjoy liability immunity.
No liability, none, zero, zip, you cannot sue the manufacturers, you cannot sue the doctors, if you or your child is hurt, has a reaction or dies they are not liable! This is the only medical procedure or medication on the market that has no liability… Why ask yourself why? And they want us ALL to take it!
The Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Alex M Azar III has granted the companies selling and there was involved in virtually any other activity related to any COVID-19 vaccine immunity from liability for any injuries caused by these products. The Declaration was effective as of February 4, 2020.
Prior to his current position, Secretary Azar was a senior executive for a major pharmaceutical company Eli Lily and Company from 2007 to 2017.
This is a screenshot portion of the Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19. It provides at all those who prescribe, administer, deliver, distribute, or dispense… and manufacturers and distributors of any vaccine used to treat prevent mitigate COVID-19.. shall enjoy liability immunity including a suit from and liability under the federal and state law concerning all claims for loss caused by arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a COVID-19 vaccine.
Well, now you do, and hundreds of thousands, if not millions of others across the nation, know now too. Check out the hashtag to see all 50 states that participated today in spreading this message. #V4VGlobalDemo#VisForVaccine
RESOURCES:
With 25 companies testing their vaccine candidates on humans and getting ready to vaccinate hundreds of millions of people once the products are shown to work, the question of who pays for any claims for damages in case of side effects was resolved back in the beginning before many states even declared an outbreak.
All planned out ahead of time. Before the vaccine with the brand new technology that messes with your, DNA was even developed. Only four months earlier, the Event 201 pandemic exercise, conducted on October 18, 2019, vividly demonstrated where they needed to tie up loose ends so that their “pandemic” could be orchestrated effectively…
There are 3 bills to be considered at the Special Session which begins Monday rumor has it that the committees are meeting to discuss all the bills on SUNDAY. The bills can be read at the bottom of the Governor’s proclamation.
WE NEED TO ACT NOW. The state didn’t mandate masks, rather, they had local cities and counties do it for them. It’s not hard to see that the same thing will happen with a vaccine. This Special Session of the Legislature beginning August 24th will provide cover to allow the government to enact such orders.
JOIN THE CITIZENS MARCH AGAINST GOVERNMENT IMMUNITY @ 7:30 a.m. Monday at the Capitol
Attend the Hearing for RS28049 10:30 A.M. Room EW42
RS28046 – the first bill attached at the bottom of the proclamation states. “An emergency existing therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, the act shall be in full force and effect on and after it’s passage and approval.” This bill makes it a LAW that an emergency exists but there is no end date for it.
Translated: This means the Governor or any other entity like a health department can use emergency powers whenever they want.
RS28049 is the last bill attached at the bottom of the Governor’s proclamation. It says that all businesses and persons will have immunity from liability for actions taken related to a “coronavirus-related pandemic or epidemic” as long as they make a “good faith effort to comply with a statute, rule, or lawful order of a government.”
Businesses that do not comply with every edict of government WILL HAVE LIABILITY. This is not about protecting small businesses, it is about compelling behavior of businesses.
Said another way, it is using society to control and exclude those who choose another path. Just as with the mask mandates, any government entity can “order” businesses to require proof of vaccination with a coronavirus vaccine in order to enter their business once the vaccine is available and there will be nothing we can do about it. And even if you are injured or killed by this brand new, experimental vaccine, you will be on your own. Interestingly, this bill will sunset July 1, 2023.
EMAIL NOW. Attend In-Person or Virtually Regarding RS28049
Per the Meeting Announcement: Limited public seating will be available in the committee room. Committee meetings will be live-streamed in designated overflow rooms throughout the Capitol.Please wear a mask and maintain physical distancing while in the Capitol.********************************************
HOUSE JUDICIARY, RULES & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. Room EW42 Monday, August 24, 2020 There is a POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY. *Limit your comments to 3 minutes.* Provide written copies for public record.
PLEASE EMAIL AND CALL OUR LOCAL LEGISLATORS AND EMAIL ALL IDAHO LEGISLATORS AND ASK THEM TO STOP THESE BILLS.
WE NEED AS MANY FOLKS AS POSSIBLE TO CALL AND EMAIL NOW!!!
TALKING POINTS – please write your own or choose from below:
1) Please oppose RS28049 which opens the door for businesses to require medical procedures to enter their premises. In the same way masks are now required, vaccination could be required, even though federal law recognizes vaccines injure and kill some recipients. 2) Please oppose RS28049 which will effectively do away with businesses that do not want to do the bidding of the government by exposing them alone to liability. 3) Please oppose RS28049 which is not about protecting businesses but compelling behavior of businesses, said another way, it is using society to control and exclude those who choose another path such as not wanting to inject a vaccine. 4) Please oppose RS28049 as a business that might require a vaccine to enter would have no liability for the damage that vaccine might cause nor would the vaccine makers which are protected under the Prep Act. Individuals will be left to fend for themselves if they suffer a catastrophic injury resulting in losing their job, excessive medical costs, and even loss of life. 20% of the formerly healthy individuals in the high dose group of the Moderna phase II trials had to be hospitalized and this vaccine will permanently alter the recipient’s DNA. 5) Please oppose RS28046 as the language of this bill is outrageous. No legislature may codify into law the existence of a state of emergency but this bill does exactly that by never providing an end date for said emergency.
6) Please support legislation that protects all businesses from liability for a customer contracting Covid in their establishment.
A mask lawsuit in Idaho is to be filed against the Panhandle Health District. The end result, if successful, would allow an otherwise free people to be able to make their own health decisions without fear of criminality.
“We care that our customers can get our milk and make choices in what they eat and how they live there lives. We trust our customers are like us – intelligent and responsible – and that they care for their neighbors as themselves. We trust them to make the right choices in regards to masking or not and think the choice should be theirs, and not the government’s.
We also do not think health boards should have the power to make otherwise law-abiding citizens suddenly criminals subject to misdemeanor charges with penalties including fines up to $1,000 and significant jail time.
Further, we care about law enforcement officers and the conundrum they are now put under with such mandates, including their own personal convictions on the subject, but now having to be put in the position of having to arrest otherwise good citizens of our counties.
We have therefore agreed to work as plaintiffs with two very liberty-minded attorneys in our area to file suit against appropriate parties seeking a temporary and permanent injunction against the mandates. “
Paul Herdon, Pleasant Meadow Dairy
Boyles Law and The MacPherson group are working together to represent several plaintiffs affected by the vague and irrational Panhandle Health District mask mandate issued on July 23, 2020. The Board of Directors for Panhandle Health District approved and issued a mandatory mask order for all persons in Kootenai County, presumably visitors, and residents. Therefore, there is now an active Kootenai County mask mandate.
Goal $25,000 for Expert Witnesses
Find out how this money will be accounted for (by a certified public accountant) and hear from Colton Boyles, one of the lawyers who has taken up the challenge to fight the mask mandate. The impact of a successful lawsuit will help preserve liberty for the ENTIRE state.
Update on Fundraiser for Mask Mandate Lawsuit to be filed Monday August 3
A WonderWe fundraiser has been established. They have asked all liberty-minded, freedom-loving Idahoans give to the cause. A $100 donation would be amazing from each and every person as we are going to need $25,000 to enter the fray. *They mention that ANY amount helps!
“We have personal convictions about government mandates and personal responsibility that favor personal responsibility and liberty over governmental mandates in every area of our lives, even public health.
Furthermore, we do not believe the science backs masks working as a deterrent to virion transmission, particularly cloth masks worn by the general populace without any personal protective equipment training, sanitation, and discipline.”
A message from Paul Herndon, Pleasant Meadow Creamery
They have created a post linking the various studies on the subject here:
Speaking of use of personal protective equipment, (PPE), we have documented evidence that not even the governor of Idaho, Brad Little, nor Anthony Fauci, the president’s advisor, properly observe exercise of sanitary PPE practices. These screen grabs are from just the last couple of days. The governor hands his mask off his ear, handles it with his fingers touching the inside of the mask, and just generally does not follow good PPE protocol.
Anthony Fauci, likewise, violates proper mask protocol. Here, he is hanging the mask below his chin having contaminated the mask with his hands, and now on his dirty and contaminated neck.
If these two guys can’t get it right, how is the general public supposed to?
The World Health Organization has produced two videos on proper mask etiquette/handling – one that is for surgical style masks, and the other for cloth masks. Note the surgical style are to be disposed of immediately after use, while the cloth ones require copious hand washing with alcohol based sanitizer even to touch the thing:
WHO Surgical Mask
WHO Cloth Masks
Centura Health did a very interesting video showing how easily your common person is going to contaminate their mask:
https://youtu.be/eVJbenwzR1s
Contaminating the Mask
Finally, we think you would find this video by Patrick Bet-David very interesting. He covers all of the above and just some common-sense practicality in regards to masking.
We care that our customers can get our milk and make choices in what they eat and how they live there lives. We trust our customers are like us – intelligent and responsible – and that they care for their neighbors as themselves. We trust them to make right choices in regards to masking or not and think the choice should be theirs, and not government’s.
We also do not think health boards should have the power to make otherwise law-abiding citizens suddenly criminals subject to misdemeanor charges with penalties including fines up to $1,000 and significant jail time.
Further, we care about law enforcement officers and the conundrum they are now put under with such mandates, including their own personal convictions on the subject, but now having to be put in the position of having to arrest otherwise good citizens of our counties.
We listened to the entire Panhandle Health Board hearing and we found the physician, nurse, and Kootenai Medical Center officers skewed the data and ramifications to sway the vote. The public was given little consideration, and the mandate was passed.
The mandate itself is vague and poorly written.
Lawsuit and Temporary Injunction
We have therefore agreed to work as plaintiffs with two very liberty minded attorneys in our area to file suit against appropriate parties seeking temporary and permanent injunction against the mandates. The end result, if successful, would allow an otherwise free people to be able to make their own health decisions without fear of criminality.
It will allow us to make our milk deliveries to Kootenai County without fear of criminality and prosecution, since we choose not to mask.
We respect your right to mask if that is what you want to do, and we do not have a negative view of that choice. It’s yours to make.
To enter this fight, and because the attorneys we will be retaining have already been busy in the whole COVID era, many times working pro bono, we want to be sure they can be compensated adequately to fight.
We are therefore establishing a WonderWe fundraiser and ask all liberty-minded, freedom-loving Idahoans give to the cause. A $100 donation would be amazing from each and every person as we are going to need $25,000 to enter the fray.
Our intent is to prepare a lawsuit this weekend with filing on Monday so we can get a hearing next week on the temporary order.
Won’t you please join us in the fight? To donate, please click this link:
There are some Idaho legislators coming to the Capitol on June 23, 2020. (This date is 90 days after the extreme emergency declaration by the Governor.) No longer should the executive branch go unchecked while our legislators wring their hands claiming they can not represent us without permission of the Governor.Our legislators are convening at the request of the people. The question we ask is “Why aren’t ALL our legislators eager to do the job we hired them to do? We the People want our representative government back. No longer should the executive branch modify Idaho law, as happened in the Idaho primary elections. No longer should the executive branch appropriate funds, as that is a clearly defined task of our elected representatives.
Representative Vito Barbieri shares why he will be at the Capitol ready to represent the people who hired him for the task of representing them, especially in times like these.
“Since the Magna Carta, through the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, to today’s Idaho Constitution, the purpose of each was to secure, under the law and with the assent of the people, the mutual well being of that people.
To suggest that the Idaho Constitution contemplates requiring permission from the executive branch for the legislature to convene is to deny the fundamental premise upon which our Republic stands: Each branch equal, independent, and separate from the other.
The executive branch asks not of the legislature permission when to act; the judicial branch asks not when it may convene; how then does the Idaho Constitution purport to require the legislative branch to appeal to a ‘higher power’ than itself? Certainly, the staunchest democrat, and even Idaho senators, recognize the inherent peril of failing to reoccupy the vacuum, failing to exercise our responsibilities, failing, even, to attempt a check on centralized power, because some opinions from some (high priced) attorneys say ‘you aren’t allowed’.
Where in that document is such a restriction specifically addressed? There is no restriction because the fundamental premise of a Republic was taken for granted by the drafters: No individual, no governor, no court, no extra-constitutional body was ever envisioned by them to control the voice, the representatives, of the people.
The power to convene, when to convene, and for what purpose to convene, fundamentally rests with the legislature, alone.
If it were otherwise, that is, that the Idaho Constitution specifically requires the people’s representatives to seek permission to convene, would not the citizens of the state rightly conclude that they have been duped into believing that Idaho government was of them, by them, and for them? (And “Was it all a lie, to keep the pitchforks at bay, as the institutions gradually but steadily encroached?”)
The Idaho Constitution is created by the people of the state to limit the power of government over its citizens. To argue that it limits the ability of the representatives of the people to convene only upon permission from the governor is to argue that Idaho has a King and that the people’s representatives must first be blessed with Imperial Grant. Such an argument, in yesterday’s America, would be absurd.
OPEN IDAHO RALLY DRAWS 1000’s
Idaho citizens are clamoring for a voice in the decisions being made by an executive branch that appears to have no check against its power. Decisions that have thrust people into unemployment after determining arbitrarily that their financial security is ‘not essential’, which in turn, evidences a gross disregard by the government of their personal wellbeing.
Decisions banning freedom to associate, freedom of religion, freedom to travel, and more, come from institutions brazenly disregarding personal liberty, the essential element of America’s founding, in the name of an ‘emergency’ that is not evidenced by the facts.
Seeing that the draconian actions were not founded upon fact, nor upon science, but upon imperfect and shifting data, rash action, and defective ‘models’,
Idaho citizens suspect that the legislature is complicit with the governor’s power grab. (The messaging, the continued farcical warnings and cautions spewing from official sources evidence to the people an inability, or likely a deliberate failure, to reexamine the facts, to admit a mistake, and to alter course.)
If not complicit, then surely, given the facts ‘on the ground’, the legislature is disenfranchised, marginalized, gutted, powerless. Such suspicions will be well-founded if the legislature shrinks now from its representative obligations.
If the legislature fails to convene prior to the January 2021 Session, it fails to exercise its responsibilities to the very people to whom the members ultimately owe their place in office: the voters, the citizens, the taxpayers. Each legislator must ask whether their loyalties lie with an Imperial Governor or with the people from whom that legislator derives his (or her) authority.
It is axiomatic that only from the people of the state is the power of a legislature to act. Not from the governor or the judiciary. It is therefore anathema to a representative government, not less to liberty and justice, for the people’s representatives to request permission, from anyone, to convene.
How can anyone argue otherwise, of a sovereign state, in America? To seek counsel, request opinions, and otherwise deflect the responsibilities inherent in elected office, is to reject the privilege granted by the franchise and to abdicate the power of the citizenry to a king or a black-robed oligarchy, or both.
This I cannot do. I will be sitting in my chair on the floor of the House of Representatives at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 to participate in and promote the legislative responsibilities granted me by the voters of District 2. I urge every other Idaho legislator to do the same. It’s time to convene for an extraordinary session.”
Health Freedom Idaho leadership understands that our liberty to choose what is right for our family is always one vote away from tyranny. With this in mind, we push ourselves harder each legislative session to protect and preserve the liberty we value in this great state.
From its inception Health Freedom Idaho (HFI) was created to preserve Idahoans’ health care freedoms.
All around us, states are battling the removal of exemptions. Amid such medical tyranny, parents are fleeing the vaccine extremism as medical refugees. As we discuss the situation with health freedom state leaders, so many regret that they did not get LOUD earlier. We at Health Freedom Idaho heed this as a warning.
Health Freedom Idaho has been ON THE SCENE since 2015.
Health Freedom Idaho has had representatives at every legislative session since 2015. Our representatives attend and testify at our Capitol on behalf of Idahoans, who value parental rights and health freedom.
Health Freedom Idaho has faithfully monitored each legislative session and kept tabs on bureaucratic activity to determine what new bills and rules might undermine Idahoans’ liberty.
Health Freedom Idaho strives to provide concise and consistent communication with members providing timely calls to action to preserve liberty.
Health Freedom Idaho has aided in drafting bills that safeguard parental rights, medical freedom, and nondiscrimination in child care, education, and employment.
Health Freedom Idaho has authored almost 1000 articles published on our website, quickly becoming one of the most significant health freedom websites nationwide
Health Freedom Idaho has maintained our social media presence amid considerable censorship and internet bullying.
Health Freedom Idaho has traveled and presented at Autism One, We the People, and other Vaccine Choice regional groups.
Health Freedom Idaho hosts our own Natural Health Symposium to provide Idahoans access to the wealth of knowledge from qualified, naturally minded health practitioners.
And we are just getting started. Rest assured that we are not backing down! We are continually doing things to effective change.
If you live in Idaho, or will soon call this beautiful state your home, we implore you to take action and join us today!
There is clear evidence that vaccines are produced using the bodies of aborted human beings and experimentation of the product was performed on severely disabled humans. Some “prolifers” have agreed that since the aborted fetal cell lines were already in existence (and not created for the purpose of making a vaccine), at least some good came from the babies who died. However, they would never condone the abortion itself.
Dr. Theresa Deisher, founder and chief scientist of the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, has questioned the necessity of a vaccine against COVID-19, saying: “[w]e’re making a vaccine at warp speed for a virus that doesn’t look like it’s going to need a vaccine.”
Deisher explains that “this virus to date has less than a 0.03% fatality rate and most of those people, I believe it’s 92% or above, have other health problems.” She added that developing a vaccine in such a quick time frame “is possible, but I don’t believe it is desirable, nor do I believe that it’s safe,” with as much as “15% of the very healthy young volunteers [experiencing] significant side effects.” Many of the initial vaccine recipients have had significant adverse reactions to the vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-19/05-COVID-CLARK.pdf
___________
Focus on the Family, and the Catholic Church (and other religious organizations* See below) make the argument that something ‘good’ was developed on the sacrificed bodies of human beings, and even though they were tested on severely disabled individuals, vaccines ‘morally’ acceptable.
We submit that their argument is ‘false thinking’ and as tainted as the vaccines themselves.
These researchers didn’t dig through discarded body parts to make something useful. The abortions were performed in such a way to deliver LIVE CELL SAMPLES to the laboratory for dissection and research. In addition, the principal researcher Dr. Plokin admits to unethically experimenting on children and adults with disabilities in order to develop his product that is now mandated to be injected into school children of all faiths.
Vaccines were cultured exclusively on animal tissue prior to the 1960’s (animals such as the rhesus monkey).
Culturing vaccines on animal cells was useful but had unintended consequences. A well-documented example is the discovery of vaccines contaminated with the SV40 virus from rhesus monkey cells used in its production.
In the early 1960’s, Dr. Leonard Hayflick was the first researcher who set out to create a “fetal cell line” for use in culturing vaccines instead of using animal tissue.
A fetal cell line is derived from live cells taken from an aborted baby. The live cells are modified so they can replicate indefinitely.
In 1962, Dr. Hayflick developed the first fetal cell line called WI-38 (Wistar Institute, 38th fetal sample) from the lung tissue of an aborted 31 week gestation baby girl.
The data in his 1961 and 1965 papers show at least 23 aborted babies used in the research around the creation of WI-38. The number is likely higher, given that some of the cell strains he researched were not documented in his published papers.
Fetal cell line WI-38 is currently being used in the
Next, in 1964 Dr. Stanley Plotkin isolated a rubella virus strain, RA 27/3 (Rubella Abortus, 27th fetus, 3rd tissue culture explant), that was later used in Merck’s rubella vaccine.
RA 27/3 was combined with WI-38 to create the rubella vaccine we use today.
It is well established that almost 80 aborted babies were used in the research leading to the development of RA 27/3. Dr. Plotkin’s 1969 article cites 76 of those abortions.
Dr. Plotkin’s value of life is revealed through his actions. He tested his rubella vaccine on orphans as young as 14 months old and “seronegative mentally retarded children”.
In a letter to the editor, he defended his colleagues’ unethical experimental research on those with disabilities at Willowbrook Hospital. He stated that “performing initial studies on children and adults who are human in form but not in social potential… nonfunctioning persons” is acceptable, even preferred. He went on to state, “Morality must be defined by circumstances and facts.”
12. In 1966, researchers at the Medical Research Council in the UK developed the fetal cell line MRC-5, from a 3 1/2 month gestation baby boy who was aborted for psychiatric reasons from a physically healthy 27 year old mother.
13. MRC-5 is used in numerous vaccines today, including:
CDC Vaccine Excipient Guide information is now being censored. The CDC has ‘updated’ their list without any changes to the vaccines themselves.
14. After their initial creation, each fetal cell line is reproduced many times over. Though they theoretically reproduce indefinitely, they have a finite lifespan of use, as they become more oncogenic (tumor-causing/cancerous) with each reproduction.
15. Due to the finite nature of the use of the current fetal cell lines, researchers have (since the 1960’s) continued to this day using aborted babies in their work toward creating new fetal cell lines.
16. Here’s a list of just a few fetal cell lines created in the years since WI-38, RA 27/3, and MRC-5 (with links to where some of these aborted fetal cells can actually be purchased): WI-44, MRC-7, MRC-9, HEK 293, PER.C6, IMR-90, IMR-91, TIG-1, Walvax-2.
17. The most recent fetal cell line, Walvax-2, was developed by Chinese researchers in 2015 using a 3-month gestation baby girl.
18. Walvax-2 researchers matter-of-factly describe intentionally aborting 9 babies using the “water bag method” of abortion. It’s illegal in the United States. As little value as our country places on life, this practice is so inhumane it is still banned in America. In layman’s terms, the mother’s uterus is filled with saline water so the baby can essentially be floated out of her uterus alive and in-tact. The baby is then given straight to researchers who quickly dissect them alive because a viable fetal cell line requires live cells. In the researcher’s own words, the “tissues from the freshly aborted fetuses were immediately sent to the laboratory for the preparation of the cells.”
19. These aborted babies were used for research in 2015, not 60 years ago. It is a current and ongoing practice.
20. Walvax-2 was specifically developed as a replacement for the aging MRC-5 cell line. It was tested with rabies, hepatitis, and Varicella viruses, and was found to be “equal or superior to MRC-5 cells for cultivating these viruses”.
Dissecting aborted babies (many presumed to be alive at the time) for vaccine research has been a consistent and ongoing practice for the past 60 years.
Researchers and scientists worked with local doctors to identify the preborn children whose sacrificed bodies would be used to “improve the health” others. The very definition of ‘child sacrifice’.
I had allowed minimal information to inform a most delicate decision for my children. I submitted without thinking critically to headlines and news articles. In the end, I allowed the thoughts of an atheist researcher with different moral, ethical and spiritual views than me to determine what I thought about such an important subject.
How does this impact the heart of our living God? As the creator and sustainer of life, I think His heart is deeply grieved over this practice.
Dr. Jay L. Wile – holds an earned Ph.D. in nuclear chemistry. He is best known as the author of award-winning elementary, junior and senior high school science courses including the Science through HisStory, “Discovering Design with…”, and “Exploring Creation with…” series. (I have these books as well and can take photos for you too)
Edward Zaccaro – Book, “The 10 Things All Future Mathematicians and Scientist Must Know (but are rarely taught)” Chapter 6: It is Important to Maintain a Healthy Skepticism subtitle The Avnit-Vaccination Movement (I have this book and the photos if you need them)
World Magazine – a magazine that is produced for youth and children to teach them a Biblical Worldview. It comes free with some curriculum
References: 1 – L. Hayflick et al., “The Limited In Vitro Lifetime of Human Diploid Cell Strains,” Experimental Cell Research 37, (1965): 615. 2 – “Gamma Globulin Prophylaxis; Inactivated Rubella Virus; Production and Biological Control of Live Attenuated Rubella Virus Vaccines,” American Journal of Diseases of Childhood 118, no. 2 (1969): 378. 3 – J.P. Jacobs et al., “Characteristics of a Human Diploid Cell Designated MRC-5,” Nature 227 (1970): 168. 4 – Ibid.,170. 5 – Transcript of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, hearing date 16 May 2001, 91. 6 – Judie Brown, “The Means of Vaccines,” National Catholic Register, April 30-May 6, 2000. 7 – J.C. Wilke, M.D., “Vaccines, Today’s Controversy,” Life Issues Connector, Life Issues Institute, July 2001. 8 – Bernard Nathanson, M.D., “Vaccines OK’d Despite Dark Past,” National Catholic Register, June 18-24, 2000.
They spray toxins KNOWN to cause cancer, weed-killer KNOWN to disrupt hormones herbicides KNOWN to be harmful to human health.The cities and counties spray toxic chemicals our sidewalks (where my children play barefoot), they spray our parks (where my children tumble and roll around) and they spray our school grounds where children spend most of the days of the weeks.
Why are we ALLOWING this practice to continue? A few unsightly weeds are not worth another cancer diagnosis in a child! Our health is valuable. Here are several ACTION STEPS you can take to protect our children!
I wasn’t really planning on doing anything as my week has been crazy busy. But, an opportunity presented itself as I drove home today to find my street being sprayed with a ‘weed killer’ along the sidewalks and in the street cracks. I stopped the gentleman who had a golf cart and two large tanks of chemicals. He was applying it with a hand wand.
I asked him “HOW DO I STOP THIS!?”
He recognized I was worried and saw the van full of kids. “My son has sensitivities to chemicals I don’t want this sprayed near my yard.” He was very kind and said just post a sign, “NO SPRAY ZONE”. He already did my house but he wouldn’t spray my property next time.
I didn’t want to be around the chemical tanks with the kids in car so I drove home to call the city. Ron from the Street Department called me back promptly. He’s been with the department since the 80’s and they have always sprayed weed killer.
No, they don’t alert the public and they spray twice a year. Yes, they use RoundUp and another cancer causing chemical combination. (Ask your city what THEY use?)
When I expressed my concerns about its new label as a carcinogen, he responded “Oh, that’s California not Idaho”. My response was “Oh, but the World Health Organization also labels it as a carcinogen. Cancer is an issue in Idaho as much as it is in California. Since 1 in 3 people get cancer it seems we should find an alternative chemical to get rid of weeds?”
It was a productive conversation. I finished the conversation with the question, “Since you said, you can’t stop spraying for weeds, how do we change the chemicals being use?”
I was told to find a product that is the equivalent to Round Up in effectiveness and cost and he would research it and be willing to approach the supervisors to make a change.
I promised him that I, a mom of a sick kid, will research and find some alternative products for their use -because its that important to me. Not just for my kids sake, but for those workers being exposed to the chemicals in large concentrations, and the families that aren’t even aware that their children’s health issues are stemming from the constant chemical exposure and their bodies unable to detox like the rest of us.
I later found out that Nampa (a neighboring city) has already committed to reduce their use of this carcinogenic chemical Glyphosate. John from the parks department told me that they put out signs when they use chemicals in the park. The glyphosate is sprayed in tree wells – an area I will have my children avoid in the future.
“Napa is phasing out the herbicide, known by its brand name Roundup, and is substituting other substances, plus increased mulching to attack weeds in public recreational areas, according to Dave Perazzo, the city’s director of parks, trees and facilities.”
Step #3 Join Others! We can do more together as a community
Join our closed Facebook Group. Learn what people are doing in your city. Join with them to unite our voices against toxins sprayed in our beautiful state.
This upcoming decision to be made by the FDA this January could take away public access to natural substances that have been providing healing to a significant number of people, specifically those dealing with cancer and other chronic illnesses. UPDATED WITH VIDEO FROM DR. KARLFELDT & Miste Karlfeldt, Executive Director of HFI
Dr. Michael Karlfeldt and Dr. Paul Anderson discuss what we can do to protect our access to things that are saving people’s lives. Dr. Anderson has been testifying and attending hearings at the FDA, where the fate of a large number of natural medicines have been under review for several years. December 4 is the last opportunity for public comment.
“In reality, what it comes down to is everything will automatically be illegal to compound, except whatever tiny fraction of substances of the already small group deemed worthy by the FDA.”
TAKE ACTION! The fate of a large number of natural medicines is under review by the FDA. COMMENT TODAY TO PROTECT YOUR ACCESS TO NATURAL SUBSTANCES that have been used for 100’s if not 1000’s of years. Comment Period Closes December 4th.
The impact on those with Cancer seeking treatment
Dr. Karlfeldt: Medically, there are a minimal amount of options for those with Cancer. If the medical community had solved Cancer it wouldn’t be any need for any other therapy. But currently, Cancer is one of the leading causes of death. One of the four people is going to die from Cancer. One natural substance that has been used effectively against cancer when all other treatment has failed is curcumin. It’s one of 240 substances on the list to become prohibited to use by compounding pharmacies.
How Did This All Come About?
Dr. Anderson: The process started the FDA asked for the natural health community that uses these things and the pharmacies that make them nominate substances. This is because the FDA didn’t know what was being made. It seemed pretty innocuous back then. So the community nominated about 300 substances, many of them natural substances or compounds that are either nutrients or herbs or parts of herbs or even mineral and vitamins, amino acids that are in our body already.
Of the 300 the FDA looked at them and basically chose 80 of the 300 to have hearing on to determine their scientific validity. The FDA then determined that everything else, about 240 substances, had no merit. They did not have a scientific review hearing.
These substances included things such as Alfalfa, Aloe, Ginkgo, Green Tea, Nettle leaf and 235 other natural substances that will not get a review hearing. The regulatory agency refuses to hear about the benefits of these natural substances. The FDA says they should be illegal to the compound.
The Fate of Curcumin (and the other 240 natural substances)If the FDA process is enacted as a federal rule, these substances will automatically become illegal to compound, without even having had a hearing. Comments close on December 4. Take a moment to comment.
Dr. Karlfeldt: A natural substance like curcumin is giving an option for people over other therapies that have failed and now FDA is wanting to take that substance away from public access. Dr. Anderson: Curcumin. I think it’s a good example because almost everybody’s heard of curcumin at this point.
Used widely worldwide, there is something like 50,000 scientific papers about curcumin as medicine and many of them address cancer or inflammatory diseases etc. The FDA is posed to remove public access to the natural substance.
What substances are affected?
This is abbreviated list comes from the interview with Dr. Anderson with Journal of Restorative Medicine
Lactobacillus acidophilus, alfalfa, anise seed, certain types of copper, certain types of magnesium, a lot of minerals, a number of herbal substances that might be used in a compounded sense, and a whole host of things nominated by pharmacists that aren’t used as medicine but are used as binders or excipients (such as powdered milk) and would become illegal according to this list for a pharmacy to use.
This action by the FDA would not affect your supplements supplier where you buy an oral pill. It would affect every other form that could be made by a legal pharmacy.
Isn’t the FDA protecting us from these unproven agents?
Dr. Anderson: So the process is really in my mind very unfair, and I’ve been a part of the process since the beginning. So that people know I’m speaking from primary experience. I helped write some of the testimony initially for all these substances. And then I’ve gone back to testify to the FDA over the last four years.
So it’s really frustrating. As a clinician, it doesn’t make logical sense that pharmacy licensed by the state board of pharmacy and regulated through FDA rules and USP rules would seem to be the safest place to get something made it, so I needed something specific.
And what date they would not be able to have it will be illegal for that pharmacy to help you. You would think that if you had really good science and you had an excellent argument, you could prevail and win. But that is not the case.
I’ve been at the hearing, and what happens it’s basically if the FDA does not want to a substance ( regardless of the science) to be available for compounding, then it won’t pass the hearing.
The FDA board has its mind made up prior to the hearings and do not change regardless of what science and evidence are presented.
The FDA can (and does) refuse to acknowledge the evidence and ignore the published science in order to stick with their decision to deny the use of a natural substance.
Isn’t it a matter of science?
Dr. Anderson: It is surprising and less you’re in the business of looking up research about nutrients and herbs and how much resources and references are available in any other natural things like licorice extract it’s been around forever with studies from all over the world. However, the way the FDA hearings are set up, if these substances do not have some very clear medical indication for which they are the only treatments, the FDA essentially tells the committee that they should not approve it.
The end goal is regulating the use of natural substances out of existence.
Is this about taking away competition from the drug side?
Dr. Anderson: The FDA tribunal said at the hearings, numerous times that they trusted the pharmaceutical companies more than they trusted the natural health community. A pharmaceutical company can’t make money on any natural substance.
Let’s talk again about curcumin. It is a natural substance the pharmaceutical industry can’t patent. So it has to be altered into a chemical – then it becomes more dangerous, more regulated but more profitable.
Dr. Anderson: There is a perfect example LIPOCURC. At the same time, we were working with the NHS integrative cancer research, a pharmaceutical company was running trials on an altered form of curcumin. We were using intervenous curcumin with an FDA registered pharmacy infusing it, without changing the molecule. A pharmaceutical company changed the curcumin molecularly so they could patent it. When we received a safety paper from their trials, we saw that they had issues at high doses. With the natural substances, we used the pathologist remarked that the blood looked better after the IV. The pharmaceutical version caused damage to the blood.
No pharmaceutical company is going to make or sell a natural substance because it can’t be patented and profited from, even if it benefits the patients.
What Can I Do?
Comment immediately Your comments may not slow down the process initially, but will give the lawyers ammunition as they appeal the FDA decision.
If you are a practitioner. Comment. If you are a patient using one of the 300 substances. Comment. Even if you don’t use a listed product now – Comment.
Dr. Paul Anderson, N.M.D., is a naturopathic medical doctor and Medical Director and Founder of the Anderson Medical Group. His facility Advanced Medical Therapies is the first of its kind in the U.S., offering therapies in multiple modalities based on his over two decades of research and patient care.
Dr. Michael Karlfeldt, ND, Ph.D, is a Board Certified Naturopath (CTN® ) with expertise in IV Therapy, Applied Psycho Neurobiology, Oxidative Medicine, Naturopathic Oncology, Neural Therapy, Sports Performance, Energy Medicine, Natural Medicine, Nutritional Therapies, Aromatherapy, Auriculotherapy, Reflexology, Autonomic Response Testing (ART) and Anti-Aging Medicine. The Karlfeldt Center is a comprehensive health treatment center that provides proven natural healthcare solutions for all ages and conditions.
In the past three years, Health Freedom Idaho has grown. HFI has successfully pushed back against liberty stealing statutes and rules, particularly those surrounding vaccines, and in the process made their presence known. Due to this, the media is beginning to take notice.
We have been told that an Idaho Statesman’s investigative reporter, Audrey Dutton, is writing a feature story on Health Freedom Idaho. In addition to requesting information from Health Freedom Idaho leadership directly, she made public records requests to obtain the names and contact information of members and individuals who testified at the recent rules hearings. She has been sending requests for interviews to Health Freedom Idaho members. We want our members to know that Dutton obtained this information through a public records request, NOT from HFI.
Ms. Dutton has publicly stated her bias against parents who opt out of some or all vaccinations. She has determined that the vaccination debate is settled despite hundreds of published peer-reviewed studies that call the safety and efficacy of vaccines into question and despite the demonstrable lies and distortions uttered by vaccine proponents. Her opinion is that parents opposed to some or all vaccination are unjustifiably fearful and/or misinformed.
Public Post from Dutton’s Facebook Page
They like to say, “The science is settled. Vaccines are safe and effective.” But is science ever settled? Ask some real scientists and I’m sure they will tell you that science is never settled but is always ongoing. It takes a great amount of arrogance to claim you know it all and there is nothing more to the story.
Yes, some parents opt out of some or all vaccines for their children and recently their voices have grown stronger as parents educate themselves on the matter and realize their right to direct the upbringing of their children is being threatened all across the nation through draconian legislation and more. Bureaucrats in Idaho have already trampled parental rights codified in Idaho statute.
Why Do Parents Hesitate to Vaccinate?
Ms. Dutton has been emailing Health Freedom Idaho members asking for an interview about their vaccine choices. But why would anyone want to talk with her when she’s already determined that those who decline vaccines are simply doing so out of fear and ignorance. And isn’t a parent’s desire to protect his or her children the most important reason to decline a medical intervention admitted to cause injury and death?
“…many parents in Idaho are opting out of measles/mumps/rubella vaccinations for their children…. The reason they balk usually isn’t religious or because of underlying health problems. It’s fear.”
One is left to wonder the basis of this assumption and why it matters. A parent has the natural right to care for their child as they see fit. They can choose whether to vaccinate or not – for any reason, or for no reason at all. That said, religion, underlying health problems, documented scientific dangers of vaccines, bad experiences of friends and loved ones, and fear are five justifiable reasons to question whether the potential benefits of vaccinating are worth the risks and spiritual objections. – Health Freedom Idaho
REFUSING VACCINES DUE TO THE TOXIC INGREDIENTS
Let’s examine the description (in part) of the MMR II, made by Merck & Co, Inc.
MMR II (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live) is a live virus vaccine for vaccination against measles (rubeola), mumps, and rubella (German measles). MMR II is a sterile lyophilized preparation of (1) ATTENUVAX (Measles Virus Vaccine Live), a more attenuated line of measles virus, derived from Enders’ attenuated Edmonston strain and propagated in chick embryo cell culture; (2) MUMPSVAX (Mumps Virus Vaccine Live), the Jeryl Lynn (B level) strain of mumps virus propagated in chick embryo cell culture; and (3) MERUVAX II (Rubella Virus Vaccine Live), the Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. {1,2}
The growth medium for measles and mumps is Medium 199 (a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum) containing SPGA (sucrose, phosphate, glutamate, and recombinant human albumin) as stabilizer and neomycin…. Each dose of the vaccine is calculated to contain sorbitol, sodium phosphate, sucrose, sodium chloride, hydrolyzed gelatin, recombinant human albumin, fetal bovine serum, other buffer and media ingredients, and approximately 25mcg of neomycin….”
Certainly Ms. Dutton cannot fault loving parents for not wanting to inject those ingredients into their healthy children. There is not a single study proving the safety of injecting all those ingredients. Is Dutton unaware of this fact?
RELIGIOUS OBJECTIONS TO VACCINES TAINTED BY ABORTION
Many individuals believe vaccines are unclean and defile the temple (their body) because of the injection of modified viruses and bacteria, toxic contaminants and ingredients, and the fact they are cultured on aborted fetal tissues and animal tissues.
What do all these ingredients mean to someone with possible spiritual objections? There are at least two answers to this question. One is the issue of abortion. The other is the multiple biblical references to introducing foreign substances into the body.
Wistar RA 27/3 is listed and referenced with WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. These are scientific terms and labels. Here is the reality of what they represent:
“The rubella virus clinically named RA273 (R=Rubella, A=Abortus, 27=27th fetus, 3=3rd tissue explant) was then cultivated on the WI-38 aborted fetal cell line. A later research paper by Stanley Plotkin [vaccine developer] would reveal that 40 more babies were aborted after RA273 was successfully isolated, with virus strains taken from 34 of them.[13A] This means a total of over 80 separate, elective abortions recorded were involved in the research and final production of the present day rubella vaccine: 21 from the original WI-1 through WI-26 fetal cell lines that failed, plus WI-38 itself, plus 67 from the attempts to isolate the rubella virus.” – Children of God for Life, Vaccines and Abortions.
For patients and parents with strong objections to abortion, this information could weigh heavily on the decision of whether or not to use products that contain aborted fetal tissue such as vaccination. (More information on aborted fetal tissue in vaccines)
RELIGIOUS OBJECTIONS TO VACCINES TAINTED WITH FOREIGN SUBSTANCES
The second potential religious or spiritual objection relates to foreign substances being introduced into the body. Many believe the Bible commands we not defile the temple God has created.
“Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”
The bottom line is vaccines contain a variety of ingredients, both intended and unintended that may toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic and even fertility impairing – from aluminum to formaldehyde to polysorbate 80 to more. It is easy to understand how many parents might view these as a violation of God’s commandment.
DECLINING FOR HEALTH REASONS
To address the issues of underlying health problems and fear, let’s look at more information provided by the vaccine maker.
Hypersensitivity to any component of the vaccine….
Do not give MMR II to pregnant females…
Anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reactions to neomycin…
Febrile respiratory illness or other active febrile infection.
Patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy.
Individuals with blood dyscrasias, leukemia, lymphomas of any type…
Primary and acquired immunodeficiency states…
Individuals with a family history of congenital or hereditary immunodeficiency….
PRECAUTIONS:
Adequate treatment provisions, including epinephrine injection (1:1000) should be available for immediate use should an anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reaction occur.
Excretion of small amounts of the live attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination.
As for any vaccine, vaccination with MMR II may not result in protection….
The health-care provider should provide the vaccine information required to be given with each vaccination to the patient, parent, or guardian.
The health-care provider should inform the patient, parent, or guardian of the benefits and risks associated with vaccination.
Manufacturers report that there are vaccine reactions that include getting measles from the vaccine…and chronic conditions such as diabetes, arthritis, brain swelling, paralysis (temporary or permanent), seizures, lazy eye and more…
The vaccine package insert contains a large section on adverse reactions, some of which include: Panniculitis, atypical measles, vasculitis, pancreatitis, diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia, anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions, arthritis, arthralgia, myalgia, encephalitis, encephalopathy, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, Guillian-Barre Syndrome, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (adem), transverse myelitis, febrile convulsions, afebrile convulsions or seizures, ataxia, polyneuritis, polyneuropathy, ocular palsies, paresthesia.”
Given all this information, the description, the contraindications, and the precautions, doesn’t some fear seem warranted? And given these risks, does Dutton really think it is her place to declare the science settled, not to mention shame parents for well-placed fear?
REFUSING ADDITIONAL VACCINES AFTER SEEING A LOVED ONE INJURED
Ex-Vaxxer NOT Anti-Vaxxer
This category of people who decline vaccinations, those who were once pro-vaccine only to experience the downside first hand, is likely the largest. Despite the fact that less than one percent of vaccine adverse reactions are reported, there have been over 87,000 reports of adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System from the US and it’s territories. And if only 1% of reactions are reported, there could be as many as 8,700,000 reactions.
Despite official reassurances that vaccine injuries are rare, parents who’ve seen their children hospitalized, stricken with chronic illnesses, paralysis, seizures, or blindness are not going to continue vaccinating. Siblings are spared the potential damage and parents are shamed for being anti-vax when they should receive our sympathy. In reality, they were pro-vaccine until they watched their child suffer and/or die. To add insult to injury, parents are shamed and targeted after vaccination injury by friends, family, and media. Many suffer in silence, raising a child with chronic illness or vaccine-induced physical challenge.
Yes, parents opt-out for religious and moral reasons as well as previous vaccine injuries. Others, faced with the decision of vaccination, having read the medical literature to truly understand the risks and being left with many unanswered questions as vaccines are not subject to the gold standard of double-blind, placebo-controlled rigor, they utilize the vaccine exemptions available through Idaho statute.
For example, parents seeking to find out how many children died in the last measles outbreak in 2019 are redirected to the CDC website. However, after scouring page after page there is NO INDICATION how many U.S. children died in the highly contagious measles outbreak. *It was ZERO for those still looking for the answer.*
Health officials, doctors, and mainstream media claim that 1 in 1000 children will die from measles but before the introduction of the measles vaccine, the reported number was 1 in 10,000. Thanks to public health measures such as sanitation and clean drinking water as well as access to healthcare and nutrition, the rate declined from 13.3 per 100,000 in 1900 to .2 per 100,000 in 1963, before the measles vaccine was introduced. No children have died from measles in the US in last 2 decades.
Some of the many unanswered questions:
Why aren’t vaccines tested according to the gold standard with double-blind placebos?
Why are they the only product that is one size fits all?
If vaccines are so safe, why is there zero manufacturer liability?
Why is the US the only country that gives the Hep B vaccine on the first day of life?
Why is it that after vaccine manufacturers received a liability-free pass, the vaccine schedule exploded to more than 70 doses of vaccines?
Why does the US give the chickenpox vaccine, when the UK and many other countries don’t, because it’s been proven to cause shingles, which is more dangerous?
Many scientists have raised the alarm on the amount of aluminum in vaccines. Why doesn’t the CDC address their concerns?
Why did the ACIP committee recently approve the new Hep B adjuvant despite the safety signal of a myocardial infarction?
Why are all four major vaccine makers (Merck, Sanofi, GSK and Pfizer), who have all been convicted of fraud, given a free pass when it comes to vaccines? Merck created the deadly drug Vioxx and is currently being sued for fraud relating to the Shingles vaccine, MMR vaccine, and Gardasil vaccine, their products are mandated for school entry?
Why do we give 26 vaccines in the first year of life to infants with immature immune systems that cannot even mount an immune response to vaccines?
Where are the safety studies on vaccines that were supposed to be conducted and submitted to the Department of Health and Human Services to ensure the vaccine’s safety?
While we are flattered that time and resources are being spent trying to figure out how a small grassroots effort could grow into an outspoken voice of freedom and liberty in Idaho – answer, because we speak the truth and it resonates – these above questions deserve a thorough examination. Is Dutton willing to ask them? What’s more, the only group possessing unfettered influence at the state and national level is the pharmaceutical industry, that is where the focus of investigative reporting should be. Dutton must possess a great deal of cognitive dissonance to believe that the same industry that has paid billions in fines for fraud and is the largest lobbyist and contributor to political campaigns in the nation, is trustworthy when it comes to vaccines even though they have no liability for these products.
Our question is whether an already opinionated journalist like Audrey Dutton is capable of reading the medical literature herself, talking to doctors and scientists with genuine concerns, investigating reported injuries and deaths after vaccines and writing a thought provoking and honest piece of journalism? Or will she simply regurgitate what conflicted officials, doctors, and vaccine stakeholders have fed her? We think educated readers know the answer to those questions.
Our question is whether an already opinionated journalist like Audrey Dutton is capable of reading the medical literature herself, talking to doctors and scientists with genuine concerns, investigating reported injuries and deaths after vaccines and writing a thought-provoking and honest journalism piece? Or will she simply regurgitate what conflicted officials, doctors, and vaccine stakeholders have fed her?
Devout parents who are worried about vaccines object to ingredients containing residual material from pigs or morally reprehensible DNA strands from aborted human fetuses. The New York Times published an article stating, “Top Jewish and Islamic scholars, the Vatican endorse vaccinations.”
Religious authorities have ‘meticulously studied how vaccines are developed and what is in them,’” says the New York Times. “and still have ruled that they do not violate Jewish, Islamic or Catholic law” or Christian traditions. (source)
In reality, State governments agencies target religious leaders. They are fed half-truths via packages of media materials on the topic. They are strongly encouraged to sway their parishioners to comply with state-mandated liability-free medical products that violate the body and contradict scriptures. Avoiding persecution by the state, some religious leaders ‘vigorously endorse vaccination’ and often avoid discussions with dissenting parishioners on the topic. Dodging church conflict, they parrot the public health propaganda of ‘safe and effective’ and ‘greater good’ mantra.
What of the concerns from members who abhor abortion and reject the notion that injecting their healthy child with a disease mixed with toxins created on the body parts of aborted human beings?
Here is a recent example attempting to stem the tide of concern of millions of Christians regarding this issue author Joe Carter writes in the Gospel Coalition Article on vaccinations:
“There are currently no vaccines created by using cells directly taken from the bodies of aborted fetuses. However, there are some vaccines created from cell lines (such as WI-38, MRC-5, HEK-293, PER C6, and WI-26) that were derived from tissue taken from aborted fetuses from the 1960s.”
You could phrase what Joe Carter stated another way: Aborted baby cell strains are used in vaccine development for vaccines currently on the CDC schedule.
Updated to include: The fact is the two COVID 19 being distributed under FDA Emergency Authorization are also manufactured using the aborted fetal cell line HEK-293. Moderna in numerous patents in the fundamental design of mRNA technology and in the original vaccine research, development, production, and testing. (see references here)
Fetal Cells & Vaccines
The screen shot below is taken from the CDC Vaccine Excipient Summary. This table lists substances acknowledged by the vaccine manufacturer “as being contained in the final formulation of each vaccine.” As you can see below in the chicken pox vaccine example, MRC-5, “human diploid cells, including DNA & protein” is included in the list of ingredients.
The bottom line is that vaccine developers used cells of aborted babies to create the vaccines we use today. They were not passive actors, and according to the manufacturers themselves, certain elements from those aborted babies remain present in the vaccines. (See resources below regarding the aborted human DNA is present in vaccinations given today)
According to the CDC these vaccines developed from aborted baby cell strains are:
Adenovirus
DTaP-IPV/Hib (Pentacel)
DTaP-IPV (Quadracel)
Hep A (Havrix)
Hep A (Vaqta)
Hep A/Hep B (Twinrix)
MMR (MMR-II)
MMRV (ProQuad)
Rabies (Imovax)
Varicella (Varivax)
Zoster (Shingles – Zostavax).
There are no U.S. approved vaccine alternatives which were not developed via abortion for Adenovirus, Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, Measles, Mumps, or Rubella.
The cell lines from two dead babies whose parents partnered with the vaccine developers are referred to (dehumanizingly) as MRC-5 (we’ll call him Jack – he was a boy) and WI-38 (we’ll call her Jill, she was a girl). Who were they? Both were about 3 and a half months when they were tragically killed in the womb. We are told Jill’s parents had her killed because they already had too many children, and Jack’s mother had him killed for “psychiatric” reasons. Neither child was deemed to be unhealthy in any way. Here is an MMR vaccine insert which lists Jill (Wi-38) under the description.
These candidates are not selected after the abortion but are meticulously screened prior to. Dr. Stanley Plotkin who developed the Rubella vaccine by using Jill’s cells testifies:
“This fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well, and living in Stockholm, presumably. The abortion was done because they felt they had too many children. There were no familial diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families.”
Plotkin further testified that in one study alone 76 aborted babieswere similarly used in the preparatory work for a single study he participated in and that he performed medical experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and babies whose mothers were in prison.
Dr Peter McCullough, an Immunologist, wrote the book, The Fetus As Transplant Donor: The Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives, on the methods used in harvesting fetal tissue in Sweden. He writes:
“They would puncture the sac of a pregnant woman at 14 to 16 weeks, put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head and attach a suction machine to remove the brain cells… At 16 to 21 weeks, they would do prostaglandin abortions where a chemical is injected into the womb causing the woman to go into mini-labor and pass the baby. Fifty percent of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.”
Christian Leaders Claim Abortion Tainted Vaccines Morally Acceptable based on Faulty Assumptions
“The key consideration in whether using currently available vaccines is licit or immoral is whether there is material cooperation with the evil act of abortion. If the abortion was conducted in order to harvest tissues that were to be used for the vaccine, then it would clearly be immoral. But in the case of the vaccines listed above, the abortion was carried out for other reasons and the tissue was acquired post-mortem for the purpose medical research.”
Dr. McCullough and Dr. Plotkin’s testimony make it clear : It’s not like these researchers would just passively sort through discarded baby parts. They were actively involved in aborting the babies in such a way as to maximize access to “fresh” tissue.
Catholic Religious Leaders “wash their hands of guilt” and encourage vaccination for ‘common good’
The National Catholic Bioethics Center : “Upon use, one should register a complaint with the manufacturer of the products as an acceptable form of conscientious objection,” the statement says. “This signals opposition to the wider, morally reprehensible practice of using the unborn as little more than research material for science.”
“There is no moral obligation to register such a complaint in order to use these vaccines,” it says, adding that “it should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”
The above statement the Catholic leaders completely ignore the proof that abortions were performed in a manner to specifically use the innocent unborn as spare parts for the intent purpose of the research and manufacturing vaccination.
According to the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii) the reason they used aborted babies is because “human cells are preferred because cells derived from animal organs sometimes may carry animal viruses that could harm people.”
Others, in agreement with McCullough, dispute the need for such practices to develop vaccines.
Either way, if you adopt the CDC vaccination schedule, you can’t avoid abortion tainted vaccinations.
Above is an excerpt of a 5 part series on Christians and Vaccinations that can be found at NewCityTimes.com
Vaccine Exemptions Protect Religious Freedom
RESOURCES: No, Aborted Fetal Cells were Not filtered out of the Final Vaccine:
A portion of the resources from COGforlife.org website (posted her as a redundancy visit their site for the full article)
Quoting:
Importantly, the new data supports NIAID’s approach to a gene-based vaccine for COVID-19 and will also be useful in other vaccine approaches including protein-based vaccines and other nucleic acid or vector-based delivery approaches. NIAID scientists designed the stabilized spike antigen based on previous knowledge obtained from studying other coronavirus spike structures. NIAID and the biotechnology company Moderna, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, are developing a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine, which directs the body’s cells to express the spike in its prefusion conformation to elicit an immune response.
And if that is not enough, Moderna’s use of HEK is not new…previous patents in 2015 show its use as well. Use the Find function and type in HEK in the search…it’s listed 76 times.
Since it deals with lung infection (which Covid-19 causes) it seems like a pretty good reference to what they are doing. The use of 293 cells is cited in several places including in the supplementary information. That is linked here:
Which clearly states they are using the Spike protein which some have tried to deny.
Under Vaccine – Quoting:
The mRNA-1273 vaccine candidate, manufactured by Moderna, encodes the S-2P antigen, consisting of the SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein with a transmembrane anchor and an intact S1–S2 cleavage site. S-2P is stabilized in its prefusion conformation by two consecutive proline substitutions at amino acid positions 986 and 987, at the top of the central helix in the S2 subunit.8
And voila – Reference no. 8 at the bottom of the page is none other than:
Wrapp D, Wang N, Corbett KS, et al. Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation. Science 2020;367:1260-1263.
Idaho Parents have a right to OPT their children out of some (or all) the state-mandated vaccines for daycare and school. There are 3 exemptions for the state medical, religious and ‘other’. Many schools will not disclose this fact, some schools will demand a form signed and completed by parents. This is NOT required by the statute. A signed parental statement of objection is all that is necessary for a parent to provide the school in order to invoke the right of vaccine exemption.
No shots, no school is simply not true!
Parent Signed Statement of Exemption from Vaccine Mandate
This is an example of text used by a parent submitting an vaccine exemption statement.
I/We, _________________, pursuant to Idaho Code 39-4802 (2) and IDAPA 16.02.15.110 I/we submit this signed statement to ______________ school officials objecting to immunizations on religious OR other grounds.
*Keep in mind you don’t have to clarify whether the exemption is for religious or other reasons.Any extra information they ask from you is used for marketing, tracking with the ultimate goal of removing the liability-free vaccine exemptions.
Idaho statute 39–4802(2) permits a parent/guardian:
The right to choose whether to vaccinate their child.
The right to opt-out without explanation of objection. This form, created by the Health Department is NOT REQUIRED by Idaho statute. Its requirement contradicts the statute which says clearly,
“Any minor child whose parent or guardian has submitted a signed statement to school officials stating their objections on religious or other grounds shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.”
After 3 years of persistence on the part of Health Freedom Idaho the form has been adjusted and Instructions to Parents regarding vaccine exemptions published by the Health and Welfare Department reflect this accurately. < See the new administrative rules for schools and daycares >
Health Freedom Idaho is resolved in stopping the deliberate attempt of the schools to violate parental authority to make health care choices and to protect the privacy of the medical information for their children. If you are having problem with schools who are not following law please contact us iamexempt@healthfreedomidaho.com
When my family and I moved to Emmett, Idaho, we were chasing our dream of homesteading and growing our own organic food. The quaint, country town seemed like the perfect escape from city life. However, we soon discovered that Gem County has a Mosquito Abatement District, something we hadn’t known before moving here.
A few years into our homesteading journey, we began to notice some alarming changes. Initially, the fogging seemed sporadic, but gradually, the frequency and intensity of spraying increased. It became impossible to ignore. Our once-thriving garden stopped producing, despite our commitment to organic practices. Our broody ducks could no longer hatch their fertilized eggs, and our chickens started suffering from paralysis, eventually dying.
The real shock came when our own health began to deteriorate. Previously, we were rarely sick, thanks to our holistic lifestyle. But now, we experienced dizzy spells, headaches, nausea, coughing, and major respiratory issues. Desperate for answers, I started investigating the chemicals used by the Gem County Mosquito Abatement District. After much persistence, I finally obtained the chemical labels and safety data sheets. What I found was horrifying.
The weekly fogging in Gem County involves the use of Permethrin, a chemical with a 300-foot swath. Our one-acre property is surrounded on three sides by roads and driveways where the abatement trucks spray. According to the National Pesticide Information Center, Permethrin can cause lung irritation, difficulty breathing, headaches, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. It lingers on plant leaves for 1-3 weeks and can remain in produce for 30-120 days after application. Moreover, it is highly toxic to cats, dogs, fish, and bees.
As if that wasn’t bad enough, we had chickens that were getting paralysis and couldn’t walk and ended up dying. But the big kicker was that fact that our family started to have serious health issues. Prior to moving here we were rarely ever sick. We are a holistic-minded family and work very hard at being as healthy as possible. We started having dizzy spells, headaches, nausea, coughing and major respiratory issues, which we still continue to have today. That’s when I started digging and discovered that the Gem County Mosquito Abatement uses harmful chemicals to abate. After much research and hassle with the Gem County Abatement Board, they finally released to me the chemical labels and safety data sheets. Most of the chemicals have trade secret ingredients, which means no one really knows what’s in the chemicals and the side effects that they may have. I was in shock!
What I discovered is that the abatement truck fogging that is done weekly, sometimes twice a week, here in Gem County all summer long uses Permethrin to kill adult mosquitoes. This chemical has a 300ft swath. My one acre property gets it on all 3 sides because they abate every road and driveway. According to the National Pesticide Information Center, Permethrin is harmful if breathed in. It causes irritation of the lungs, nose, difficulty breathing, headaches, dizziness, nausea and vomiting. It also stays on plant leaves for 1-3 weeks and studies have shown trace amounts of Permethrin in produce 30 – 120 days after planting. It also effects cats, dogs and is highly toxic to fish and bees.
The Alarming Truth About PermaSense 4-4 and Mosquito Abatement Chemicals
Here are some concerning realities surrounding PermaSense 4-4 and the chemicals used in mosquito abatement programs. Firstly, let’s address the elephant in the room: PermaSense 4-4, a product designed to combat mosquitoes, is actually prohibited for use in Florida, according to its own product label. This begs the question: why would a state known for its warm climate and mosquito prevalence ban such a product? The answer lies in the concerning ingredients it contains. One of the key components of PermaSense 4-4 is Petroleum Distillate, a substance that is insoluble, meaning it does not dissolve in water. Instead, it settles in the sediment of lakes, ponds, and rivers, potentially causing long-term environmental damage.
But that’s not all – Petroleum Distillate has been linked to respiratory issues, dizziness, headaches, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation, raising serious concerns about its impact on human health. If that wasn’t alarming enough, the abatement process itself employs a staggering array of up to nine different chemicals, some classified as adulticides (targeting adult mosquitoes) and others as larvicides (targeting mosquito larvae). These chemicals are applied through various methods, including quad or aerial drones, truck fogging, and aerial planes, blanketing vast areas with potentially harmful substances.
One of the most concerning chemicals used in this process is Naled (Dibrom), a known carcinogen that is aerially sprayed from planes. Dibrom breaks down into Dichlorvos, another carcinogenic compound. According to the International Agency for Research on Carcinogens, laboratory tests have shown that Dichlorvos can cause leukemia and pancreatic cancer, raising grave concerns about the long-term health implications of exposure to these chemicals. Sources:
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the aerial spraying of Dibrom can travel up to one-half mile from the application site, potentially exposing a vast area to its toxic effects. The agency further warns that Dibrom is moderately to highly toxic to birds and fish, posing a severe threat to the delicate ecosystems it touches.But the dangers don’t stop there. In tests conducted on birds, Dibrom has been shown to reduce egg production and hatching success, potentially disrupting the fragile balance of nature. Similarly, growth tests on fish have revealed the detrimental effects of this chemical, casting a dark shadow over the health of our aquatic environments.
As an organophosphate, Dibrom’s impact on human health is equally concerning. Exposure to this chemical can lead to a nightmarish array of symptoms, including headaches, muscle twitching, nausea, diarrhea, difficulty breathing, depression, seizures, and even loss of consciousness. These effects are not mere inconveniences but potentially life-threatening conditions that demand our utmost attention. Adding to the growing list of concerns is the presence of Naphthalene in Dibrom.
According to the EPA, Naphthalene is classified as a possible human carcinogen, and the state of California has included it on its Proposition 65 list of known carcinogens, further underscoring the grave risks associated with this chemical.Sources:
After all this research and knowing that my family and property have been having harmful side effects, I decided to contact the Gem County Abatement and tell them I do not want to be fogged or sprayed. I was met with great opposition by the manager of GCMAD. I was told that these chemicals are safe and effective and they are spraying according to the EPA safety levels. I explained my concerns along with other people who are having similar issues. We even attended a GCMAD meeting to express our concernment of the side effects from these chemicals. The board cut us off when we were talking, and GCMAD has an attorney that told us that we are no longer allowed to ask questions about the chemicals. Since that meeting last September the GCMAD board has not addressed our questions.
After continued emails to the manager of the GCMAD we were told that we can opt out of abatement if we filled out their form. I read their form and felt it was far overreaching concerning my property rights. They proceeded to present the Idaho Law to me saying they have every right to come onto my property.
Idaho’s Mosquito Abatement Laws Spark Debate Over Public Health and Private Property Rights
Many Idahoans are voicing concerns over the state’s mosquito abatement laws, citing potential conflicts between public health measures and personal liberties, including property rights. The controversy centers around Title 39-2804, which grants abatement districts broad authority to conduct mosquito control measures, even on private property. According to the law, abatement districts have the power to “come on [one’s] land and abate” mosquitoes, with limited options for property owners to opt-out.
While residents can choose to forgo adulticide truck fogging and larvicide treatments, they are reportedly prohibited from opting out of aerial spraying, a practice that has raised concerns among some citizens.”I was told that by no means are we allowed to opt out of aerial spray,” said Emmett resident who has been researching the issue. “This law seems to conflict with our constitutional rights to protect our property and secure our safety.”
The Idaho Constitution, Article 1, guarantees the right of “enjoying and defending Life, Liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; pursuing happiness and securing safety.” However, Title 39-2804 appears to grant abatement districts the authority to monitor private property and conduct treatments if deemed necessary, regardless of the owner’s wishes.”By signing the abatement district’s form and agreeing to Title 39, they essentially have the right to come onto my land and abate, even if I’ve opted out,” Doe explained. “This raises concerns about government overreach.”Critics of the law also point to potential trespassing concerns, citing Idaho’s Trespass Law, Title 18-7008, which defines trespassing as “entering upon or over real property either in person or by causing any object, substance or force to go upon or over real property.” Aerial spraying, they argue, could be interpreted as a form of trespassing. Environmental concerns have also been raised, with some arguing that the indiscriminate elimination of insects disrupts delicate ecosystems and could lead to unintended consequences. Additionally, the potential contamination of groundwater and soil from chemical treatments has sparked fears about long-term health risks. Despite repeated attempts to engage with state officials, representatives, and local authorities, concerned citizens like Doe have encountered resistance and closed doors.As the debate intensifies, calls for transparency, public discourse, and potential amendments to Title 39-2804 are growing louder. The clash between public health measures and personal liberties promises to be a contentious issue in the coming months.
A Call to Action for Idahoans: Embracing Knowledge and Safeguarding Our Future
Fellow Idahoans, the time has come for us to heed the lessons of history and take a stand against the potential perils that lurk in the shadows of our mosquito abatement practices. We cannot afford to remain complacent, for the consequences of inaction could be dire.Let us not forget the cautionary tale of DDT, a pesticide once heralded as a safe and effective solution, only to be banned by the EPA in 1972 due to its devastating effects on the environment, wildlife, and human health. The scars left by this chemical serve as a grim reminder of the price we pay for ignorance and blind trust.
We cannot, in good conscience, wait another 50 years to uncover the potential side effects of the chemicals currently in use. To do so would be to gamble with the well-being of our communities, our children, and the very land that sustains us.
Knowledge, as Rachel Carson so eloquently stated, is power. “It is the public that is being asked to assume the risks that the insect controllers calculate. The public must decide whether it wishes to continue on the present road, and it can do so only when in full possession of the facts.”
Idahoans, we have an obligation to demand transparency, to seek out the truth, and to make informed decisions that prioritize our health, our safety, and the preservation of our natural wonders. We cannot turn a blind eye to the potential consequences of the chemicals raining down upon our properties, seeping into our soil, and contaminating the very air we breathe.In the words of Jean Rostand, “The obligation to endure gives us the right to know.”
We have endured enough uncertainty, enough closed doors, and enough dismissal of our concerns. It is time to raise our voices, to demand answers, and to chart a new course – one that embraces sustainable practices, responsible stewardship, and a unwavering commitment to the well-being of our communities and our environment.Let us not be remembered as the generation that stood idly by, ignoring the lessons of the past. Instead, let us be the catalysts for change, the torchbearers of knowledge, and the guardians of a future where our children can thrive without fear of unseen dangers.
Idahoans, the time to act is now. Join me in this call to action, for together, we can forge a path toward a safer, healthier, and more sustainable tomorrow.
Parents Jessica and Shawn tell the story of how their son, Stami, ended up in a coma for over a month. CPS took all four of their children who were unvaccinated and homeschooled. The Nevada CPS judge mandated they be fully caught up on the childhood vaccine schedule. After the second round Stami’s health deteriorated and has now been in a coma for over a month as of this interview. Stami has been diagnosed with ADEM.
Please pray for this family and help fund their fight for Stami’s life and the safety of all four of their children.
On Feb 20, 2024, Our son Stamwulf, who we call ‘Stami’, suddenly fell unconscious while asleep, after not feeling well the day before, and was rushed to the local emergency room, where doctors decided to take him by life-flight to Sunrise children’s hospital for emergency treatment, not knowing what was happening to this otherwise happy, healthy six year old who had only been sick with a cold one time in his life, and that was several years before. After being put into a medically induced coma in order to intubate him on a life support ventilator, doctor’s ran so many tests over the next few days, it was hard to keep track of them all: spinal tap, MRI, CAT scan, blood tests, viral and bacterial tests, etc.
After almost a week, we received the devastating news that our son had massive swelling of the brain and spinal cord, a rare but sometimes deadly condition called ‘Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis’ or ADEM, is an immune-mediated, inflammatory, monophasic, demyelinating condition that affects the white matter of the brain and spinal cord. As a rapidly progressive post-infectious encephalomyelitis, ADEM is characterized by demyelination in the brain and spinal cord as a result of inflammation following infection or immunization.
The Power Struggle: Parental rights and state intervention
In a series of deeply troubling incidents, the Child Protective Services (CPS) has overstepped its boundaries, resulting in traumatic separations of children from their families and questionable medical interventions.
The ordeal began for Shaun and Jessica when their children were forcibly taken by CPS and vaccinated. This led to their son, Stami, being hospitalized in a coma for over a month. The emotional toll on the parents due to the unjust removal of their children by family members and the misuse of mandatory reporter laws was immeasurable.
Legal battles ensued parents were confronted by armed police officers without a warrant. Despite their objections, a court ordered the children to be vaccinated and attend public school against their parents’ wishes. The parents faced bureaucratic hurdles, including discussions on religious exemptions and the difficulties of navigating a complex legal system.
In a particularly alarming case, a CPS judge in Nevada misinterpreted the law, ordering children to attend public school and be vaccinated based on personal beliefs rather than legal grounds. This incident raises serious concerns about the potential for abuse of power by CPS judges and the undermining of parental authority. The judge’s refusal to reschedule hearings and lack of due process further exacerbated the situation.
In a heart-wrenching account, Jessica recounted her son’s emergency room admission and subsequent coma. Frustrations mounted as CPS mandated vaccinations and her lawyer’s lack of action resulted in her children receiving vaccines against her wishes. Then she was left to navigate the legal proceedings alone after her lawyer quit unexpectedly during a court hearing.
The challenges of court battles over health care decisions for children (discussed at minute mark 24:15) emphasize the devastating impact on families and the lack of understanding from authorities. The legal system pits parents against each other, undermining family unity and perpetuating destructive systems that inflict trauma on children.
Caseworkers Assumed Knowledge In a series of deeply troubling incidents, the Child Protective Services (CPS) is overstepping its boundaries, resulting in traumatic separations of children from their families and questionable medical interventions. Caseworkers often assume expertise in various fields, including medicine and law, leading to uninformed decisions that can have detrimental effects on children’s well-being.
Financial Strain for Families The financial burden placed on families by CPS is unreasonable. Required classes recommended by caseworkers can cost families over $1,000 per person, adding to the stress of dealing with a child’s medical emergency. Families may also struggle to afford private attorneys, further complicating their situations.
SUPPORT THIS FAMILY THROUGH THEIR FUNDRAISER
Financial Incentives for System
Financial incentives that benefit government-funded systems like CPS are tearing families apart. The system’s reliance on children being in school creates challenges for homeschooled children and parents.
There is a pressing need for advocacy for a child’s well-being within the child welfare system, especially amidst medical emergencies and bureaucratic challenges.
The community is urged to support families facing government intervention, emphasizing the need for collective action to address systemic issues and provide assistance.
These incidents underscore the urgent need for accountability within the CPS system, as families continue to suffer due to the abuse of power and lack of proper assessment in CPS interventions. The emotional and financial toll on families is immense, highlighting the devastating consequences of a system that is supposed to protect children but often causes more harm than good.
Part 4: Steps Forward: Holding Cloud Seeding Accountable
Demanding Notification and Transparency
The current cloud seeding program in Idaho potentially infringes on private property rights, yet residents are not provided the option to opt-out or even notified before spraying occurs. It’s high time for Idaho to adopt responsible measures seen in other states, such as public hearings and publishing notifications in newspapers at least two weeks prior to the start of the program. Shockingly, Idaho lacks such public notification services, leaving citizens in the dark about activities that could impact their health and property.
Following Montana’s Responsible Model
Our research highlighted Montana’s commendable approach to cloud seeding, serving as a model of transparency, accountability, and regulation. Our bill aimed to replicate their method by implementing clear notification, permitting, licensing, and liability provisions for cloud seeding operators.
These recommendations are not just reasonable but necessary for building public trust in the cloud seeding program. By adding these provisions to HB 266, we have taken a step towards ensuring that cloud seeding operators bear some of the liability for their activities.
Time for Action
It’s time for every Idahoan to question why our state is allowing such risky experimentation without adequate safeguards. We urge you to spread the word and take action to hold our legislature accountable for implementing responsible and transparent cloud seeding practices.
Find a Weather Modification Generator or Flight Path Near You:
Proposed FY2024 Budget for the Secondary Aquifer Fund, Cloud Seeding: $7M. Cigarette tax proceeds contribute to the totals listed here, highlighting the significant investment in this experimental program.
The Idaho Legislature has authorized the creation of “weather modification districts” that can levy up to 4 mills in property taxes to fund weather modification activities. This is outlined in Idaho Statute 22-4302.3
The Idaho Water Resources Board (IWRB) and Idaho Power Company (IPC) collaborate on cloud seeding programs in Idaho, with the IWRB overseeing the programs and IPC providing the majority of the funding.
According to the presentation slides, the “Collaborative Cloud Seeding Program” in Idaho has an estimated annual operations cost of $3,995,000. This covers projects in the Boise River Basin, Wood River Basin, Payette River Basin, and Upper Snake River Basin.5
The state of Idaho has provided around $14,050,000 in total funding contributions to support the development and analysis of these weather modification programs over the past several years.5
What You Can Do:
Call or Write Your Representative: Reach out to your representative and express your concerns. Encourage them to support responsible cloud seeding practices. The bipartisan support our bill received is encouraging, and your voice can make a difference.
Sign the Petition: If you’re concerned about cloud seeding operators receiving special liability protections and want to see responsible testing practices, sign our petition to make your voice heard.
Want to Learn More?
NOAA weather modification reports often include maps showing the locations of generators used to disperse chemicals. Reports from Idaho Power, Let it Snow (owned by Marty and Conni Owen), Weather Modification Inc., and others can be found here.
Conclusion
As Idahoans, we must demand accountability and transparency from our legislature regarding the cloud seeding program. It’s crucial to implement responsible practices that protect our health, property, and environment. Take action today to ensure that our state prioritizes public safety and well-being over risky experimentation.
Part 3: Proceeding with Caution in Weather Modification
Experimental Approaches Raise Concerns
Idaho Power has been cloud seeding since 2003. It now operates 57 remote ground generators in the Payette, Boise, Wood River and upper Snake River pumping a variety of chemicals into the skies to ‘increase precipitation’. Our state budget has 7 million ear marked for just cloud seeding for the fiscal year of 2024. (see page 34)
Idaho Power’s 2021-2022 cloud seeding application revealed the use of “liquid propane for testing purposes” without specifying the quantities[^1^]. The lack of transparency regarding the amount of liquid propane used and the experimental nature of such tests underscores the need for greater public awareness and oversight of cloud seeding operations in Idaho.
Idahoans deserve to be informed about any experimental “test” activities conducted by Idaho Power or other cloud-seeding operators. Transparency is crucial to ensure that citizens understand the potential risks and impacts of these weather modification techniques on their communities and environment.
Assessing Chemical Impacts
Ongoing testing to assess the environmental impact of silver iodide and other seeding agents is a responsible measure to safeguard against long-term accumulation damage. Our legislation included provisions requiring the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to conduct and report on testing in seeded basins[^1^].
However, a FOIA request to DEQ revealed a lack of records and testing procedures, contradicting statements made by Kala Golden at the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR)[^1^]. The discrepancies highlight the importance of ensuring that DEQ is actively involved in testing and monitoring the environmental impacts of cloud seeding operations.
Increasing Usage Quantities
Recent NOAA reports indicate an increase in the dispersal rate of silver iodide from 7-8 grams per hour to 20 grams per hour[^1^]. The rationale behind this increase remains unclear and raises concerns about the potential for over-seeding, which could decrease moisture levels and impact local ecosystems.
Without required ongoing testing and monitoring, it is challenging to determine the accumulation levels of seeding agents in the environment, further emphasizing the need for comprehensive and transparent monitoring programs.
Disclosure of Chemicals Used
Earlier NOAA reports revealed the use of multiple chemicals, including silver iodide, ammonium iodide, ammonium perchlorate, sodium perchlorate, and acetone[^1^].
Chemicals Used in Cloud Seeding:
Silver Iodide (AgI):
Description: Silver iodide is a chemical compound that is commonly used in cloud seeding to induce precipitation.
Potential Environmental Hazards: While silver iodide is generally considered to have low toxicity, there are concerns about its environmental accumulation and potential long-term impacts on ecosystems. Silver ions can be toxic to aquatic organisms and may bioaccumulate in food chains.
Ammonium Iodide (NH4I):
Description: Ammonium iodide is another iodine-containing compound that can be used in cloud seeding.
Potential Environmental Hazards: Ammonium compounds can contribute to nutrient loading in water bodies, potentially leading to eutrophication. Excessive levels can harm aquatic life and disrupt aquatic ecosystems.
Ammonium Perchlorate (NH4ClO4):
Description: Ammonium perchlorate is an oxidizer that is sometimes used in cloud seeding to enhance the formation of ice crystals in clouds.
Potential Environmental Hazards: Perchlorate compounds can persist in the environment and may contaminate groundwater. Chronic exposure to perchlorate can interfere with thyroid function in humans and wildlife.
Sodium Perchlorate (NaClO4):
Description: Sodium perchlorate is another oxidizer that can be used in cloud seeding.
Potential Environmental Hazards: Similar to ammonium perchlorate, sodium perchlorate can contaminate groundwater and pose risks to aquatic ecosystems and human health due to its impact on thyroid function.
Acetone (CH3COCH3):
Description: Acetone is a solvent that can be used as a carrier or dispersant for other cloud seeding agents.
Potential Environmental Hazards: Acetone is relatively volatile and can contribute to air pollution. It can also contaminate water bodies and soil, posing risks to aquatic life and terrestrial ecosystems.
However, current reports only mention silver iodide, raising questions about the full disclosure of chemicals used in cloud seeding operations.
Our legislation addressed the reporting requirement for disclosing all chemicals used in weather modification activities, ensuring greater transparency and accountability in cloud seeding programs.
Transparency and Public Involvement
While weather modification programs are required to submit interim and final reports to NOAA, the current database lacks searchable document fields, limiting public access to information[^1^]. Reports typically cover a 5-6 month window without providing exact dates of seeding activities, further reducing transparency.
The public should be notified about cloud seeding activities, and public hearings should be held to ensure that citizens have the opportunity to voice their concerns and ask questions about these experimental weather modification techniques, as modeled by other states.
In conclusion, as we continue to experiment with nature through cloud seeding and other weather modification techniques, it is crucial to proceed with caution and prioritize transparency to protect the well-being of citizens and the environment.
BOISE, Idaho — As cloud seeding programs continue to be implemented across the western United States, concerns are growing over the potential risks and unintended consequences, including the risk of flooding and environmental damage. With an annual budget of $7 million, the Idaho Power Company’s cloud seeding program, along with the oversight from the Idaho Water Resources Board (IWRB) and Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR), has come under scrutiny for its management and transparency.
Cloud seeding is a weather modification technique used to enhance precipitation, primarily through the dispersal of silver iodide or other substances into clouds. While some studies suggest it can increase precipitation by 5-15%, the impacts are not always easy to quantify, and the potential for unintended consequences, such as flooding, remains a concern1.
The recent flooding events in the Wood River Valley in May 2023 have raised questions about the role of cloud seeding in exacerbating flooding conditions. According to documents obtained through a FOIA request, the cloud seeding program in the Wood Basin area was terminated in March 2023 due to high snowpack levels and water supply forecasts2. Yet, just two months later, significant flooding occurred, leading to mandatory evacuations2.
Idaho Power’s weather modification application outlines termination procedures and safeguards to suspend or stop the program when certain conditions arise, including the risk of potential flooding3. However, the responsibility of managing these risks and the burden placed on citizens in case of accidental operator error or unknowingly contributing to environmental damage remains a contentious issue.
“Is it responsible to place the risk burden on the citizens in case of accidental operator error or unknowingly contributing to environmental damage?” questions the full report on Idaho Power’s cloud seeding activities3.
Temperature shifts, which can contribute to snowmelt and runoff, were not explicitly considered when earlier season cloud seeding took place. This raises concerns about the potential contribution of cloud seeding to the runoff flooding experienced in the Wood River Valley2.
In response to these concerns, a recent 2023/2024 NOAA report by Conni Owen revealed that Idaho Power has created a new daily-updated long-term suspension criteria named the Flooding Index. The report also highlighted drawbacks to the Snow Water Supply Index (SWSI), which Idaho Power previously relied on, including inconsistencies in thresholds and database dependencies4.
The shift to new methods by Idaho Power is raising questions among Idahoans about the adequacy of the previous flood index and the need for more robust and transparent monitoring and evaluation of cloud seeding programs.
The delicate balance of nature isn’t as easy to manipulate as some presume, and the complex and sometimes unpredictable nature of cloud seeding underscores the need for careful oversight and transparency. As cloud seeding continues to be used as an experimental program with the potential to cause environmental and property damage, there is an urgent need for the government to prioritize the safety and well-being of local communities and ensure that proper safeguards and transparency measures are in place.
CTASB 1380 MUST BE STOPPED‼️We have 1 chance to stop this bill. It will likely be heard on the house floor on Monday. This bill creates a new agency It expands beyond legislative or judicial oversight with the ombudsman for health and human services appointed by the governor (not elected by the people). This bill threatens transparency and accountability by allowing the ombudsman to operate in secrecy, shielded from public scrutiny. Act now to defend our rights and demand accountability from our representatives.
Send an email today urging them to oppose SB 1380 and protect our freedoms!
HFI is very familiar with the problem we face with Idaho CPS and helps parents regularly. Educational information attached below.
~CPS is used as the stick to coerce parents into medical treatments including vaccines. ~CPS medically kidnaps our children if we decide to explore other treatment options. ~CPS steals our children under the guise of medical neglect when the parent takes their babies into the hospital for care.
***This is outrageous and should not be tolerated but SB 1380 is not the solution and will only create more of a problem.
1.) SB 1380 grows the executive branch by creating a new self-governing agency with an ombudsman for health and human services appointed by the governor. See 67-2601. It will operate independently of the legislature, the courts, the H&W Dept and any other state agency or department. See 56-1902 (1).
2.) SB 1380 protects the ombudsman from redress by the citizens of Idaho. See 56-1906. It states that an individual who willfully interferes with or impedes the ombudsman in the performance of their duties will face a fine of up to $1,000 and up to 6 months in jail. They may explain this away as being intended to not hinder the work of the ombudsman but will undoubtedly be used against the people to impede the exercise of our 1st amendment rights.
3.) SB 1380 allows the ombudsman to operate in secrecy and makes them untouchable by protecting them from public records requests. See 56-1908.
❌You can’t fix BAD government with MORE government.
🤔Why is a supposedly conservative legislature attempting to grow the executive branch?
To avoid spam filters on the Legislative email system, it’s best to email representatives in groups. Simply compose your email, make duplicate copies, and send each copy to different groups of legislators. This ensures they receive your email without it being caught in a spam filter.
If enacted, this H653 would absolve pesticide manufacturers of any accountability for harm caused by their products, regardless of the evidence of harm. Just two weeks ago, this crucial bill was defeated by a full Senate vote. Yet now, it resurfaces under a different number. Why the sleight of hand? To shield manufacturers from the repercussions of their unsafe products, placing profit above safety. Supported by Bayer, the company behind Monsanto’s Roundup, which has been embroiled in countless lawsuits due to its glyphosate-containing herbicide. Despite a staggering $10.9 billion settlement in 2020, H 653 seeks to grant sweeping legal immunity to pesticide manufacturers.
We staunchly oppose this bill as it blatantly disregards public health in favor of protecting corporate interests.
“If we have learned anything over these past few years, it is to not blindly trust the so-called experts; the mere fact that something has been designated as EPA compliant does not mean it isn’t causing cancer. I am hopeful that, with the preservation of the common citizen’s right to his day in court, the truth of actual health impacts will organically come to light through evidentiary proceedings.
– Ben Toews Idaho State Senator District 4 (about the previous immunity granting bill sb1245 voted down in the Senate.)
BAYER IS IN THE WRONG AND THEY ARE TRYING TO LEGISLATE IMMUNITY
Granting immunity to large corporations through legislation is a betrayal of justice. When profit is prioritized over human life, accountability and informed consent is abandoned. Let’s demand that companies prioritize safety over dollars and uphold the sanctity of every individual’s well-being.
Miste Karlfeldt, Health Freedom Idaho
Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, has faced numerous lawsuits related to its product Roundup, which contains the herbicide glyphosate. In June 2020, Bayer agreed to a settlement of $10.9 billion to resolve about 125,000 lawsuits related to Roundup23. The settlement was intended to resolve approximately 75% of the claims made against the company, with individual plaintiffs estimated to receive between $5,000 to $250,000, depending on their circumstances and the strength of their cases.
The bill would eliminate the ability for Idaho farmers, farmworkers, landscapers, neighbors, or others to participate in these suits. Instead, Idaho taxpayers, insurance companies, and individuals would be responsible for covering the costs associated with these damages. Local research in Idaho has shown elevated levels of pesticides in pregnant women who live close to agricultural fields.
The studies found a correlation between agricultural pesticides and cancer in Western states, including Idaho23. The specific pesticides and their effects may vary, as one study highlighted a strong connection between the fumigant pesticide metam sodium and total cancer rate4. –Read More Here
Communities with larger populations, such as Caldwell and Nampa, are also exposed to cancer-causing chemicals. A study conducted in Idaho revealed an increased occurrence of cancer linked to pesticide exposure. Consequently, the threat extends beyond rural areas to impact urban residents, where neighborhoods often border agricultural fields. Recent reports highlight that individuals living in Nampa and Caldwell are exposed to these chemicals simply by residing near these fields.
Testimony from Senator Brian Lenny
Idaho’s has a bill on deck that basically throws a giant, indestructible shield around Big Pharma, (in this case, Bayer) RE: their cash cow, glyphosate in Roundup. Are you kidding me?! Where’s the accountability? Where’s the protection for the little guy… the everyday person who trusts these products are safe? Are we trading crops for cancer? Slamming the door on this one isn’t just a no; it’s a HELL NO. Corporate immunity on this level isn’t just over the top; it’s a leap into a realm where consumer safety takes a backseat to profit. And that’s a ride I’m not willing to take.
Senator Brian Lenny
Key Concerns:
Lack of Accountability for Harmful Products:H653 essentially grants blanket immunity to pesticide manufacturers, regardless of the harmful effects their products may have on human health. This undermines the principle of corporate responsibility and leaves affected individuals without recourse for seeking justice.
Health Risks Associated with Pesticide Exposure: Numerous studies have linked exposure to certain pesticides with serious health ailments, including cancer, Parkinson’s disease, and neurological disorders. By shielding manufacturers from legal consequences, H653 disregards these well-established health risks and prioritizes corporate interests over public health.
International Discrepancies in Pesticide Regulation: While many countries have banned certain pesticides due to their harmful effects, the United States continues to approve their use. H653 further exacerbates this discrepancy by preventing affected individuals from seeking legal redress, thereby perpetuating a cycle of harm.
Financial Implications: The bill shifts the burden of covering damages associated with pesticide exposure onto Idaho taxpayers, insurance companies, and affected individuals. This not only undermines accountability but also imposes additional financial strain on already vulnerable populations.
Environmental Impact: Pesticides not only pose risks to human health but also contaminate groundwater and harm wildlife. The lack of accountability for pesticide manufacturers perpetuated by H653 exacerbates environmental degradation and threatens the long-term sustainability of Idaho’s ecosystems.
CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATOR TO TELL THEM TO OPPOSE 1245 IMMUNITY FOR CHEMICAL COMPANIES
In conclusion, Health Freedom Idaho urges the Idaho Legislature to reject H653. By opposing this bill, legislators can uphold the principles of public health, corporate accountability, and environmental protection. It is imperative that Idahoans retain the ability to seek legal recourse for damages caused by pesticide exposure and that pesticide manufacturers are held accountable for their actions. We stand firm in our commitment to promoting health freedom including freedom from toxins for the health and well-being of all Idaho residents.
The studies found a correlation between agricultural pesticides and cancer in Western states, including Idaho23. The specific pesticides and their effects may vary, as one study highlighted a strong connection between the fumigant pesticide metam sodium and total cancer rate4.
Research conducted by Boise State University, as reported in various sources. The study found that pregnant women living near agricultural fields in southern Idaho had significantly increased concentrations of the pesticide glyphosate in their urine, especially during the spraying season. The research team collected 453 urine samples biweekly from 40 pregnant women for this study24.
Several countries have banned or restricted the use of glyphosate due to health concerns. Some of these countries include:
Austria: The Austrian parliament voted unanimously on a partial ban of glyphosate, prohibiting its use on “sensitive” areas and for private use13.
Belgium: Banned the individual use of glyphosate3.
Germany: Has banned glyphosate in public spaces and plans a total ban by 202424.
France, the Netherlands, and Belgium: Glyphosate is banned for household use2.
Mexico: The Supreme Court denied appeals from major agrichemical corporations, affirming the country’s glyphosate ban14.
Vietnam: Is the only country in Asia to have fully banned the use of glyphosate15.
These bans and restrictions are often due to concerns about the potential link between glyphosate and health issues, including cancer and environmental impact
Did you know that as of right now, high school seniors lose their vaccine exemptions as soon as they turn 18 years old? Or that Idaho universities aren’t required to provide any immunization exemptions to students, even for religious reasons?
This bill addresses that oversight in current legislation and would prevent the state from coercing individuals into violating their sincerely held religious or moral beliefs in order to continue their education.
HB 597 provides immunization exemptions for state colleges and university and for high school students who are 18.
There is obviously a gap in Idaho law which HB 597 gives the legislature the opportunity to remedy. It is an inherent right and is supported by ID law that a parent makes health care decisions for their child. When a person reaches majority age that decision-making and ownership shouldn’t then transfer to high school or college administrators. The new adult should not then lose rights because they become of majority age. The decision to receive vaccinations is now inherently the right of the adult and should be supported by ID law.
Miste Karlfeldt, Executive Director of Health Freedom Idaho
BILL PURPOSE
This legislation is intended to address two issues. The first is the 12th grade immunization requirement for which there is no exemption when a student is age 18 during their 12th grade school year. The requirement can be found in IDAPA 16.02.15.100.06.c. The second is to prevent colleges and universities in the state of Idaho from infringing on the privacy rights of students by requiring vaccination status or the disclosure of confidential medical information as conditions of enrollment or attendance. The exemptions currently described in §39-4802, §39-1118, and IDAPA 16.02.15.110 apply only to minor children and require parent or legal guardian signature.
SEND AN EMAIL TODAY Make sure your voice is heard (and that all legislators receive your testimony by sending your email through our secure server.
Support H597 to protect the rights of Idaho students beyond the age of 18. Every individual should have the right to make informed choices about their own health without fear of discrimination or invasion of privacy. Contact your representatives now and urge them to vote YES on H597!
This bill will be heard in the Senate Health and Welfare Committee on March 18, 2024 in Room WW54 at 2:00
