Moral law v. secular law; standards for vaccines

Also welcome to new readers.

Hello to new readers, and old readers too. I’ve gotten a lot of new subscribers in the last week or so, and am very grateful for every reader. I’ve also heard from one person who apparently didn’t sign themselves up. At their request, I unsubscribed them from the administrator side of Substack. If you’re getting this and don’t want it, please unsubscribe or send me an email and I’ll take you off the mailing list.

---

Comment from TS on American Domestic Bioterrorism Program

In reality though, none of this is legal. They have just constructed an elaborate facade of legality.

Reply:

Agree, sort of. I think there’s a distinction between natural, legitimate law, and unjust, illegitimate law. The things they’re doing are completely unnatural, and illegitimate from a moral standpoint. But they have actually been passed through legal procedures by secular governments.

It’s very similar to segregation laws and Martin Luther King Jr.’s analysis, citing St. Augustine, that “an unjust law is no law at all,” and therefore should not be obeyed. Letter from Birmingham Jail.

Here’s what’s interesting to me, and points to a possible gap in the would-be tyrants’ armor: they want to be perceived as legitimate authority figures, exercising legitimate authority.

The tyrants don’t want to just have more guns and bigger armies and control populations with force. They want people to think that what’s happening is morally okay because it’s legal on paper.

Otherwise they wouldn’t have spent all these decades putting together the laws and regulations and guidance documents at all these different levels (international, federal, state, county, local).

Which also gets at your point: increasing the number of people who understand that the laws are there, and also understand that the laws themselves are morally illegitimate, erodes the perception of legitimacy that the tyrants really want to have.

---

Read an interesting quote at Brandon Smith’s Alt-Market yesterday, in Economic World War: Who Benefits and How Much Time is Left?

Smith quoted Council on Foreign Relations member Richard Gardner, published in Foreign Affairs magazine in 1974:

In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “blooming, buzzing confusion,” to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

---

Comment from TS at American Domestic Bioterrorism Program: Regulations, rules and Guidance Documents:

Early on in the panic I read that there are legal criteria that must be met before vaccine approval is considered in the US. From memory, these are, loosely, that the disease must be of at least a certain lethality to a certain percent of the population and spread easily, that effective treatments do not exist, that the vaccine has been proven to be safe and effective and offers long lasting protection and is not cost prohibitive. Cost being defined not only as the amount of money but all other costs included such as having to take a long distance trip to receive it.

I am needing to find the source of this, which I believe was a legal case. Can you or any of the readers here, point me in the right direction to find this?

Reply:

I think that may be true for ordinary vaccines, but because the Covid-19 injections are classified as ‘medical countermeasures’ they are legally distinct from vaccines, and none of the rules and review procedures that would apply to vaccines apply to countermeasures.

Working on a close-read of the 1986 National Vaccine Program act, which set up part of the basic legal platform under one of the three primary statutes: 1944 Public Health Service Act (which operates alongside 1938 Food Drug and Cosmetics Act and 1935 Social Security Act).

The vaccine act section of the Public Health Service Act is 42 USC 300aa-1 et seq.

If you look at the Notes tab, you can see the list of amendments passed after the original section was added in 1986.

From the 1938 FDCA side, there are several different categories of products that FDA allegedly reviews and approves, including biologics, drugs, devices, Investigational New Drugs (IND), Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE), pandemic products, epidemic products, and medical countermeasures (MCMs).

I’m in the process of trying to untangle how and where those classifications cross and diverge from each other, but the gist is that they’ve set it all up to make massive legal loopholes to enable anything they want to do.

The only thing needed for the Emergency Use Authorization classification to apply is a Health and Human Services Secretary declaration that the medical countermeasures are needed.

I think the best source for tracking down the laws underneath that HHS declarative act is the six-page Federal Register entry from March 17, 2020, when HHS published its’ justification for the EUAs, etc.

They want to be perceived as exercising power legitimately.

I haven’t done a close read of that yet either, just skimmed it, so if you read it closely and figure things out, please let me know. Email me at kgwatt@protonmail.com or post as a comment.

---

St. Barbara. Patron saint of artillerymen and armorers.