Medical Tyranny: Future UK PM Keir Starmer “We Have to Deal with the Anti-Vax Campaigns Because They Will Cost Lives”

What’s your Reaction?


Kier Starmer, quite possibly the next UK PM:

“We have to deal with the anti-vax campaigns, because they will cost lives.”

“And if we need to pass emergency legislation to deal with them, I’ll be quite prepared to work with the government on that… And the sooner we do that, frankly, the better.”

Starmer has a problem: there was no real vaccine for COVID-19, for which the term anti-vax is therefore irrelevant!

VINDICATION: CoV Bioweapon Injections WERE NOT VACCINES and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just concurred! NO MORE mRNA mandates:

“Addressing the merits, the panel held that the district court misapplied the Supreme Court’s decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), in concluding that the Policy survived rational basis review. Jacobson held that mandatory vaccinations were rationally related to preventing the spread of smallpox. Here, however, plaintiffs allege that the vaccine does not effectively prevent spread but only mitigates symptoms for the recipient and therefore is akin to a medical treatment, not a “traditional” vaccine. Taking plaintiffs’ allegations as true at this stage of litigation, plaintiffs plausibly alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine does not effectively “prevent the spread” of COVID-19. Thus, Jacobson does not apply.”

In: Case: 22-55908, 06/07/2024, ID: 12890145, DktEntry: 54-1, Page 1 of 33 In Health Freedom Defense Fund v. Los Angeles Unified School District! Congratulations to Health Freedom Defense Fund and their remarkable counsel George Wentz for this victory for humanity!

In a recent trio of cases, the Supreme Court vacated as moot lower court judgments concerning COVID-19 vaccination mandates following the rescission of those mandates. Payne v. Biden, 144 S. Ct. 480 (2023); Biden v. Feds for Ded. Freedom, 144 S. Ct. 480, 480–81 (2023); Kendall v. Doster, 144 S. Ct. 481 (2023). Relying on Payne, Feds for Medical Freedom, and Doster, we determined that a challenge to the executive order mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for federal contractors became moot upon rescission of that executive order; we vacated our court’s earlier opinion, dismissed the appeal as moot, and remanded for the district court to vacate portions of its order regarding the moot claims. Mayes v. Biden, 89 F.4th 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2023). The case before us now warrants the same result.

What’s your Reaction?


Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

To Top