The Nuremberg Code, a part of which is listed listed at the end of this post (concerning informed consent), came about in the wake of World War II, the result of a public trial of Nazi leadership figures in the Nuremberg Trials, lasting from 1946-49. These days we call such public displays “virtue signalling,” as in the wake of the war the Allies were much in need of a public face lift. Crimes against humanity knew no nationality, and my own country, The United States, was sorely in need of a public trial and a few ritual hangings. But victor’s justice prevailed. The Nuremberg Code led to the subsequent 1975 Helsinki Accords, designed to ease the stalemate between the West and the USSR that existed at that time. Article VII of the Helsinki Accords reads as follows, promoting
This was apparently intended as a slap in the face to the USSR, again, virtual signalling and nothing more. Neither the Nuremberg Code nor the Helsinki Accords have force of law or treaty behind them, and as such are merely window dressing. In fact, during the current “pandemic,” they’ve been ignored in total. It’s a good thing for leadership, as if these enunciated principles carried with them force of law, our prisons would be over-populated and thousands of white lab coats would be hanging in the closets. The medical and scientific professions are as corrupt as anything that might have existed in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union that led to this massive display of false righteousness called Nuremberg.
Another interesting facet of the Nuremberg Trials is what is known now known as the “Nuremberg Defense” wherein various Nazi officers claimed innocence from any of their crimes due to the fact that they were just following orders. True culpability for the horrors of that regime, we were told, lay with higher figures. This was a quandary for the court, as it is a true and unfortunate facet of human nature, and especially of military personnel – that trust in command relieves them of moral responsibility for their actions. There is no need to think when one’s job is as a subordinate to higher authority. Punishment follows failure to follow orders, and not for crimes embedded in the orders themselves.
Eventually it was decided that while the Nuremberg Defense had some merit, there could be no public whitewash, so that inferior officers were indeed found culpable for their actions, and only subject to lesser punishment. This applies, then, to every “Health” agency in the United States, all culpable for crimes against humanity, their only defense, extreme ignorance of real science coupled with complete subordination to agencies like WHO and CDC, neither a paragon of virtue.
In 1960 Nazi officer Adolph Eichmann was captured in Argentina and brought to Israel for another virtue-signalling charade and extravaganza. Political theorist Hannah Arendt sat through the trial, and later reported in her 1963 book, Eichmann in Jerusalem, on the apparent indifference of Eichmann to his horrible crimes. She called his attitude the “banality of evil,” that is, the mere fact of carrying out orders relieved Eichmann, in his mind, of guilt. Arendt later crystalized this line of thought, tracing such indifference and blind reliance on authority in a book called The Origins of Totalitarianism. In short, she learned that people are slaves because they allow themselves to be enslaved. There is not enough resistance in the general population in any country, least of all the United States, to overcome the “…vast networks of corrupted people with an interest in maintaining tyranny.” (Étienne de La Boétie, 16th century French political theorist).
I think Arendt missed entirely something much bigger, either by design or tunnel vision, that being that Eichmann was knowingly in a show trial, and after would escape unharmed, perhaps even returning to Argentina and the good life. Over time this has been a growing suspicion within me, that Nuremberg, Helsinki, and Eichmann are so easily ignored because it is known within the tight cluster of people (La Boétie’s “vast network” of corruption) behind these public showcase’s that the world needed heroes and villains, and that it was important to get out in front and make sure that the world “correctly” perceived that the Germans were the villains, and that Allied forces were heroes.
We are currently involved in a mass experiment called “Covid-19” which carries with it an experimental vaccine. No one taking the vaccine is being made aware of its experimental nature, or the true devastation being left in its wake.
Please note that there are apparently two streams of information coming out of CDC regarding Covid-19 vaccine deaths, and that this website, called OpenVAERS, shows 5,165 deaths and 56,740 serious events. I do not know which data source is more accurate, but conservatism would dictate use of the OpenVAERS numbers, which would yield, according the the Harvard Pilgrim Study, 39,731 to 172,167 deaths, midpoint 105,149. That’s not as holocaustic in nature as the figures I draw down by accessing VAERS directly.
Further, in accessing VAERS directly, a second source of information, I find that today (6/5/21) it is reporting 15,496 deaths, 2,187 more than just yesterday. Normally, VAERS is updated every Friday, so this is unusual. Further, I took a sample of states, two of our most populous being New York and California, reporting 193 and 312 deaths respectively. Those would not begin to add up to the 15,496 even with addition of the other 48 states. In fact, if proportionate to all of the US population, those two states would have 1,865 deaths in total. Something is fishy.
Which data sources is accurate? I will from this point forward rely on OpenVAERS, knowing that all data handed us by CDC is suspect, and that all of our questions are relegated to “unknown unknowns.” There is nothing in our public officials, especially medical, that we can rely on.
The Nuremberg Code regarding use of humans in medical experiments:
- The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
- The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
- The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
- The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
- No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
- The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
- Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
- The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
- During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
- During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.