No division, black and white unite

Can vaccine cause infertility - Prof. Dolores Cahill

Just in case you feel tempted to kiss a chicken 🐔

If you're in the USA - OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) have now said if employees are forced into having a COVID injection by their employer and anything goes wrong it will now be recorded as a work place incident, which now opens them up to being sued by the employee.

This is already starting to have an affect with some companies


https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2021/05/19/clayco-reverses-vaccine-mandate-osha-guidance.html

Construction firm Clayco has stepped back from a previously announced firmwide vaccine mandate in response to a recent federal guideline that treats adverse vaccine reactions by workers as "reportable incidents," or incidents that count against a company’s safety record.

... The OSHA guideline treats adverse reactions to vaccines as reportable incidents, but only for firms that mandated the vaccine. Companies that simply encourage vaccinations do not have to record any adverse reactions as reportable incidents.

📚 *OUR ENGLISH COMMON LAW REQUIREMENTS*
*FOR *BONA FIDE VACCINES IS*

📚 *A BONA FIDE VACCINE*
REQUIRES INFORMED CONSENT,

A) VIA A SIGNED PRESCRIPTION, FROM A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL,,

B) VIA THE ENCLOSED INFORMATION PACK, OF WHICH ALSO CREATES A CONTRACT,,


📚 *A BONA FIDE VACCINE*
IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO
UNDERGO MANY YEARS OF TESTING FOR ITS SAFETY,,

📚 *A BONA FIDE VACCINE*,
IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE OVER
5- YEARS OF RECORDINGS,
TO PROVE, IT'S LONG TERM EFFECTS,

📚 *A BONA FIDE VACCINE*
IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO;
PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE OF ITS SAFETY, AND IT'S LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS,,

*A BONA FIDE VACCINE*
IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PROOF, OF IT'S LONG TERM PROTECTION,

It’s going to seem like we are being forced into a small sub culture of outcasts. Actually the energy of this is 50/50 and eventually we become the dominant aspect of society until such time as we are all like us. That’s going to take time. So whilst it’s going to look strange and pretty scary for us, actually it’s not in the long term. We are pioneers of a totally new society. We are the ones that thrive. The old system simply cannot and will not sustain. When we get together our levels of unity and connectedness and true love for one another will be felt by all of us. We will together create true euphoria and bliss for one another, the natural state of the human being. Hang in there, stand strong and cultivate temperance and stamina for what is to come. It is important we create what we all came here to create....and we will and it will be so worth it. We are doing this not just for ourselves but for our great great grandchildren and all our descendants. We will go down in history as the forefathers (and mothers) of the New World (as opposed to the New World Order) 💛💛💛

This is a good video to share with people who said the magnet didn’t stick to them or their friend.

Carmen, the creator of this video is in the comments if you want to speak with her!

FOLLOW US FOR MORE INFO ON COVID VAX INJURIES 💉💉💉💉

This is the recording that goes with the vaccine Center visit number 2..... I have started to share it from after personal details given.

Why is this substance in the Moderna COVID vaccine?

SM-102: heptadecan-9-yl 8-((2-hydroxyethyl) (6-oxo-6-(undecyloxy) hexyl) amino) octanoate

The safety data sheet lights up with adverse effects/warnings regarding SM-102. For example: “Suspected of causing cancer. Suspected of damaging fertility or the unborn child. Causes damage to the central nervous system, the kidneys, the liver and the respiratory system through prolonged or repeated exposure. Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects.”

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/19/shocker-why-is-this-substance-in-the-moderna-covid-vaccine/

Sources:

[1] https://emergency.cdc.gov/coca/ppt/2020/dec-30-coca-call.pdf
[1b] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RcgAXSKQyw
[1b1] https://youtu.be/9RcgAXSKQyw?t=638
[1b2] https://youtu.be/9RcgAXSKQyw?t=840
[2] https://www.caymanchem.com/msdss/33474m.pd

All health care professionals need to know, or be reminded of this.
They are obligated to report all adverse reactions to medicinal products which carry a Black Triangle. This is not open to opinion or interpretation.
https://www.medicineslearningportal.org/2015/08/reporting-to-mhra.html?m=1

An employer who requires employees to wear a face covering in an office environment should know that this is not a legal requirement, except in relation to a designated business within statutory rules. Therefore, employers should consider the guidance on face coverings for the particular type of work involved as part of a risk assessment.

In England, employees in the following sectors must wear a face covering:
• shops
• supermarkets
• bars
• pubs
• restaurants
• cafes
• banks
• estate agents
• post offices
• public areas of hotels and hostels

Any employers who do not fall into one of the above categories of business should therefore be aware that asking their employees to wear a face covering is a request. They should also be aware that face coverings are NOT in fact a replacement for other ways of managing risk. The most effective methods of preventing the transmission of a virus remain social distancing, regular hand washing and cleaning.

Given the nature of the request to wear a face covering in a business not within any of the above categories, and the fact that it is likely to be unrelated to an employee’s duties, an employer may wish to put the obligation on a contractual footing. Employers may, therefore, decide to try and introduce a contractual requirement. However, a contract of employment is a legal agreement between the employer and the employee. Its terms cannot lawfully be changed by the employer without agreement from the employee (either individually or through a recognised trade union), and in any event an employer should not breach equality laws when changing contract terms. See further here https://worksmart.org.uk/work-rights/pay-and-contracts/contract-changes/can-my-employer-change-my-contract-employment.

So if a change of contract has not happened, and the request to wear a face covering is just that, (ie the business concerned is not one within the list of mandatory businesses above), an employee may refuse the request to wear a face covering.

In such a case, the employer should consider the reasonableness of imposing sanctions if employees do not wear a face covering, against its health and safety obligations. In this regard an employee may wish to furnish their employer with several peer reviewed medical reports about the dangers of face coverings and mask wearing, which can easily be found online.

The employer should also consider whether face coverings are a proportionate way to address risk, taking into account the employer's health and safety risk assessment, and perhaps the evidence that face coverings in fact represent a real threat to health. Specific objections by an employee should be considered on a case by case basis.

Before enforcing a face covering policy within a business not caught by the legislation for the same, it may be beneficial and indeed good practice for employers to consult employees and their representatives to see what opinions are held. Employers should also consider taking legal advice before introducing such a policy to ensure they have taken all of the necessary steps.

Employers will generally be vicariously liable for the negligence of their employees, which means that an employer may be liable if someone’s health is damaged due to their employee’s negligent disregard of health and safety rules. In practice, however, it would be very difficult for anyone to show that they contracted Covid-19 because of an employee’s failure to wear a face covering.

In all cases, that is where it is not mandatory to wear a face covering at work, and even where it is, employers should be careful about introducing and enforcing blanket policies requiring employees to wear face coverings, as they could run the risk of unlawfully discriminating against people who have legitimate reasons for not wearing them. For example, it could be indirect disability discrimination to discipline an employee who suffers from COPD for not wearing a face covering if they are unable to do so because it would prevent them breathing properly.