IOJ's Public Comment To CDC Probably Wont Stop CDC From Incorporating Covid Vax Into Childhood Vax Schedule. Looks Like IOJ Team Has To Sue CDC!

There is no way IOJ is accepting the ACIP's abuse of discretion to authorize using a forced medical gene altering treatment to regulate access to education! We will file a citizens petition, then sue.

Interest of Justice sent the following comment to CDC’s ACIP advisory board October 20, 2022.

We just want to remind everyone the advisory board is not the final decision maker, which is why we pay no mind to their early abuse of discretion to unanimously vote yes and put it on CDC. We are over the top and demand an answer in good faith, but we know they wont respond with evidence to any contentious matter because they really are not obliged to respond to our comment.

CAN THE UNANIMOUS ACIP VOTE STILL BE OVERRIDDEN WITH COMMON SENSE & LAW?

MAYBE, JUST MAYBE LAW AND ORDER WILL PREVAIL! LETS TRY IT.

The gene therapy mislabelled as a vaccine doesn’t confer immunity so not too sure how they can be added to the immunization schedule.  It’s illegal.  We plan to sue CDC.  Read more! 

In Regards To: FRN October 2022 ACIP Meeting

Posted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Sep 18, 2022  identified by Docket No. CDC-2022-0111

Thursday October 20, 2022

Dear CDC,

Interest of Justice demands you do NOT include covid-19 vaccines into the immunization schedule: (2) The term “immunization” means an immunization against a vaccine-preventable disease.

COVID-19 has proven itself to escape immunity and it is not a vaccine preventable disease.

Furthermore, its is well settled that the COVID-19 vaccines do not confer immunity, therefore do not meet the statutory definition of vaccine as defined in US code  [26 USC § 4132(a)(2)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/4132#a_2) vaccine (2) Vaccine The term “vaccine” means any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of 1 or more diseases.

The legal problem that must be dealt with immediately by FDA is the EUA laws have 2 prongs:

1. to prevent infection, (which is why it was authorized for emergency use, to prevent covid) or

2. to treat an existing disease.  (these children have no disease to treat - its a hypothetical possibility of a disease which is not authorized)

During the past two years, CDC has developed an unprecedented amount of scientific knowledge about COVID-19, mostly still hidden by CDC and not acted upon to protect the public. What is revealed however, says a lot about absolute nullity of the EUA.

We have learned a fatal flaw about the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines: they do not prevent people from becoming infected with, or transmitting COVID-19.

Gene Therapy or Vaccine as defined by the legislator? People have the right to know the truth.

The EUA was issued to prevent covid, its a fraud of law to continue under that prong of the EUA law, which of course makes the approval VOID ab inito because it was always known by CDC, WHO and FDA that it couldn't work as a preventative or to confer immunity.

The CDC, FDA and WHO defines vaccines more broadly, but let us remember, the CDC is not empowered by USA law to use or rely on the WHO's or CDC's definition. CDC and FDA can rely only upon the OFFICIAL definition of vaccine in:

[26 USC § 4132(a)(2)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/4132#a_2)  (which is clearly violated, leaving CDC with zero statutory authority to incorporate the COVID-19 [non]vaccine product into the childhood vaccine schedule).  Adding the [non]vaccine to the schedule would be in excess of statutory jurisdiction, void and actionable.

At this time no mRNA product has ever been found to be effective for the prevention or prophylactics of infectious diseases, only monoclonal antibodies, so rationally the EUA for mRNA products cannot be under the EUA prong to prevent infection or confer immunity.

The only other prong and Congress narrow intent is that an EUA can also be issued to treat an existing disease. Congress never authorized any use of investigational products outside clinical trials in healthy masses of people, with no disease to treat, especially with no informed consent that death is a known common adverse effect.

It's illegal to give to healthy people mRNA at this time because FDA’s EUA violates superior laws and other nations regulatory provisions who rely on FDA to harmonize laws to meet FDA’s international duties.

FDA 2020 guidance (and "current thinking" on gene therapy products) says, "an immune response to self antigens from gene therapy may introduce the risk for auto-immune like reactions", therefore, the new CDC and WHO definition of vaccine for gene therapy conflicts with Congress intent and is void.

Vaccines confer immunity, not give you enhanced disease and auto immune like reactions.  Adding the dangerous product to children’s schedules is criminal and violates Nuremberg Code on its face as well as Siracusa Principles Article 69b non derogable right to be free of medical and scientific experimentation.

It is not proper, scientific or legal to determine a vaccine is to "stimulate an immune response". It's arbitrary and capricious and in excess of authority to redefine vaccine in a way that conflicts with  26 USC § 4132(a)(2) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/4132#a_2

Moreover it's dangerous and recklessly endangering life by giving people enhanced disease, or Antibody Dependent Enhancement like AIDS.

Moderna says the bivalent vaccines create even more antibodies than the monovalent. This is absolutely unacceptable because the FDA said in 2018 the NMU response to self antigens from gene therapy may introduce the risk for autoimmune like reactions. Now the bivalents double the risk.

NO FORESEEABLE RISK FOR CHILDREN IS ACCEPTABLE OR ETHICAL.

THESE GENE PRODUCTS HAVE A WELL DOCUMENTED LIST OF ADVERSE EFFECTS INCLUDING DEATH, HEART DAMAGE, IMMUNE DAMAGE AND MORE

If you have more of an immune response stimulated by the covid-19 vaccine product the FDA themselves has confessed that an increase in immune response to the self antigens introduces the risk for autoimmune like reactions. Interest of Justice did not make up this statement, this is a statement of the FDA in a guidance recommendation that was finalized in 2020 regarding gene therapy that the FDA, WHO and CDC are now in violation of by promoting the lie that a vaccine is to stimulate an immune response knowing that in immune response to this exact product creates autoimmune like reactions!

UK Government data and all kinds of data that has been censored by the FDA and their cohorts within the CDC and WHO absolutely show that these bivalent and gene therapy products that the FDA is authorizing are destroying peoples immune system causing antibody dependent enhancement that the FDA warned people about in 2020 but is now facilitating and causing with these reckless acts of approving a situation to stimulate immune response with gene therapy products in healthy masses of people.

FDA and CDC breached duty when they authorized these products with the facts sheet omitting a warning of the risk of autoimmune like reactions and death which is common according to FDA and CDC own phase 4 data.

We rebut the presumption of CDC that “state laws and common law governing the administration of investigational medical products such as informed consent laws are preempted by Federal law “because the laws that demand more requirements of CDC stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress and conflicts with the exercise of federal authority under 564”.

In our opinion it is the opposite, because we presume the application of 564 to justify emergency use authorization for use in mass populations of healthy people is in reality thwarting the will of Congress, who wrote into that law the right of review of the circumstances that might warrant revocation of the EUA.

The EUA should be revoked and no composition changes allowed due to large numbers of credible reports of adverse events (number or severity) linked to, or suspected of being caused by, the EUA product.

Courts have stated that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution can operate to nullify both state legislative requirements and state common-law duties, but CDC forgot that would require due process to prove in this case of experimenting on healthy babies and people.

Federal law does not supersede CDC's duties under international human rights obligations. We invoke the right to demand the EUA for all mRNA products revoked today based on the phase 4 data in our FDA slides VBRPAC June 28, 2022 showing death is common and illegally omitted in the fact sheets.

Another possible option for consideration by CDC is to review the phase 4 data and review the circumstances and appropriateness of an EUA, including circumstances that might warrant revocation of the EUA. FDA may revise or revoke an EUA if the circumstances justifying its issuance (under section 564(b)(1)) no longer exist, the criteria for its issuance are no longer met, or other circumstances make a revision or revocation appropriate to protect the public health or safety. Such circumstances may include significant adverse inspectional findings (e.g., when an inspection of the manufacturing site and processes has raised significant questions regarding the purity, potency, or safety of the EUA product that materially affect the risk/benefit assessment upon which the EUA was based); reports of adverse events (number or severity) linked to, or suspected of being caused by, the EUA product; product failure; product ineffectiveness (such as newly emerging data that may contribute to revision of the FDA's initial conclusion that the product "may be effective" against a particular CBRN agent)

FDA and CDC have a duty to determine that it is appropriate to protect the public health or safety to revoke all failing mRNA products Authorization rather than to try to prop up a failing product by skipping trials and having no data at all. The data we do have shows death. You CANNOT skip trials and be in compliance with international laws regarding investigational medicines, no matter what errors CDC believes.

We challenge the CDC’s authority and jurisdiction and accuse all members of misconduct now for hiding trial fraud and authorizing EUA’s with 12 year old Maddie De Garay in the hospital.

We presented data from any ongoing testing (e.g., longer term stability data) or other data or information that may change CDC’s evaluation of the product's safety or effectiveness and that become available during the period of review or the term of the EUA. Such data should be submitted to CDC when such data become available, and you already had the data, its your own data that death is COMMON. The GAO says CDC and FDA are in violation due to political interference in scientific decision making. We agree, and accuse FDA, CDC and all people involved in these decisions of willful misconduct and demand you cease and desist the experiments on healthy people and children.

We require your response within the legal limit and as urgently as possible. Please provide your evidence of the safety and efficacy of any mRNA product and proposed composition changes.

In particular we require your duty of substantiation and motivation to explain the necessity, legality, reasonableness and proportionality of the use of these gene therapy products outside clinical trials in health babies of 6 months old and up. The CDC is required by law to meet the burden of proof and once jurisdiction is challenged.

There is no authority for CDC to proceed in this matter of childhood [non]vaccines until our presumptions are either agreed with or rebutted with evidence. Failure to rebut the presumptions and phase 4 evidence herein will result as a settled fact.

Thank you for your prompt assistance in this serious matter and appreciate all of your help working with us to ensure CDC’s does not make the error of exceeding statutory jurisdiction.

IOJ DEMANDS that you revoke the EUA authorization, or at minimum, IMMEDIATELY suspend it so the CDC can properly meet their State obligations to international law which requires a public hearing for CDC to meet the burden of proof of trial safety data, how 8 mice that died is sufficient, to explain why this gene therapy not pose an unreasonable risk like the FDA previously said in 2020, as well as to hear our expert evidence that was not taken into consideration and re- consider the potential risks and rewards in injecting young kids with these experimental pharmaceuticals.

B. Statement of Grounds

1. HHS Emergency declaration exceeds statutory authority under EUA 333b and common law, not strictly required by exigencies  * no reasonable belief  * ordinary treatments available, * not used or shown to have failed when Emergency issued, not in good faith

2. Interfering in Dr. Patient relationship

3. Fact sheet omits equitable access to treatments, suggests only alternative vaccines must be recommended to comply with law, omitting the ordinary treatments that preclude and legally prevent the EUA's validity.

4.  Immunity with least burdensome review and non binding recommendations to known repeat offenders criminals under PREP and CARES acts is abrogation of duty to safety oversight - exceeds statutory jurisdiction - not immune - now the liability of FDA according to the international law of States responsibility

5. Known significant risk of Death being common, #7 effect after 30 days, especially for men over 60 not in fact sheets

6.  Known significant risk of ADE for all human participants due to "immune response from self antigens increases risk of auto immune like reactions" not in fact sheets

7. Increases susceptibility 44%, prolong and exacerbate alleged pandemic

8.  Known significant risk of affecting DNA, causing long term significant effects and cancers up to 15 years later not in fact sheets

9.  Known significant risks from gene therapy mRNA products are unreasonably risky if used in more than a few participants, which is not the same as than the influenza and traditional vaccines not in fact sheets

10. Hiding info of death 1223 deaths in first 3 months from public for 75 years is conspiracy to commit trial misconduct as defined by HHS OIG.

11. Misbranding gene therapy as a vaccine- adulterated

12. False advertising

13. Confidential with WHO - FOIA'd under common law interest alleged corruption.

14. It’s illogical to compare influenza variant vaccines not going through clinical trials to mRNA (that FDA says is unreasonably risky if used in more than a few people at a time) and justify skipping trials in mRNA based on the practice of skipping trials in a different type of product known to have less or no real risks.  FDA compared apples to oranges by saying the admittedly risky mRNA can skip all future trials and committee reviews due to approved safe influenza vaccines skipping trials, and this is illogical and irrational as well as void for violating the unequivocal rules of science and law required by Siracusa Principles.  A maxim of law is similar is never the same and these are not bio-similars - they are bio-different's.

15. no compelling public interest - would fail test under common law stricter standards

16. arbitrary

17. unscientific

18. not proven test for legality, proportionality, reasonableness and necessity

19. State not met burden of proof for science, or "robust regulatory review" that CR testifies is why they rely on FDA

20. More risk than benefit is new data released AFTER authorization

21. Least burdensome review cuts ethical corners required by superior law in regards to bioethics

22. Exceeds statutory authority to set covid precedent EAU to EUA

23. Bioweapons

24. Violations of International law

25. Violates Costa Rica law - not harmonizing

26. Violates US law

---

Knowledge and foresight of unreasonable risk was not considered in "totality of evidence" due to gross negligence, or the only other logical conclusion is CDC is acting with malice and intent to cause harm to babies and the human genome.

During the time gene therapy began until today CDC learned there would be unreasonable risk if administered to more than a few people at a time. Petitioners refer the Commissioner to our slides we presented to VERPAC, which quotes FDA guidance recommendations based on FDA's knowledge of the inherent risks of gene therapy.

FDA's 2020 gene therapy guidance recommendations (which FDA says is their "current thinking on the matter") says "there is an unreasonable risk" in widespread use of this gene therapy which they say can affect DNA and cause cancers, auto immune like disorders and long term adverse effects.

It is not yet proven safe or effective because it is investigational.

Its irrational and illogical for FDA and CDC to say the investigational shots are safe and effective to give to masses when the FDA also has a truthful (and contradictory) website stating the opposite: https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-expanded-access-and-other-treatment- options/understanding-investigational-drugs

This FDA website states:

"An investigational drug can also be called an experimental drug and is being studied to see if your disease or medical condition improves while taking it. Scientists are trying to prove in clinical trials:

If the drug is safe and effective.

How the drug might be used in that disease.

How much of the drug is needed.

Information about the potential benefits and risks of taking the drug."

Finally, remember that approved drugs have completed extensive testing in clinical trials and there is scientific proof that they are safe and effective for treating the particular disease or medical condition that has been studied.

FDA published serious risks and concerns about these same types of gene therapy products in 2020, but to approve these products in 2020 until today, the same FDA is ignoring the unreasonable risks known in FDA guidance recommendations they published just 4 years ago!

This focus on the government's decision-making process means that a plaintiff in an administrative law case can show the government acted arbitrarily because it "ignored ... evidence altogether or provided reasons for its decisions that were contrary to the evidence presented." Innova Sols., Inc. v. Baran, 338 F. Supp. 3d 1009, 1024 (N.D. Cal. 2018) (discussing cases). There is concrete evidence of the FDA ignoring evidence altogether here, as well as clearly showing provided reasons for its decisions ("totality of evidence") that were contrary to the evidence presented.

It's not true the decision was based on a totality of evidence because if the following list of evidence we provided were considered, in particular that death is common and the  # 7 effect after 30 days of taking BioNtech the FDA and CDC would have restrained the agency from violating the laws we showed would be violated.

If the evidence were truly considered by people without conflicts of interest they would only be one rational decision, which is to not approve the investigational bivalent gene therapy [non]vaccines under an EUA for use in masses of healthy people and babies.

The gene therapy products called vaccines are known by FDA and CDC to affect the DNA according to 2020 guidance of the FDA's "current thinking on gene therapy", causing cancers, long term delayed adverse effects and ADE destroying peoples immunity for life.

There is no other conclusion that FDA and CDC are ignoring the evidence that death is common which we presented from FDA and CDC 4th phase trial data, and if not ignored and FDA actually KNOWINGLY factored in that DEATH IS COMMON it means FDA's act of authorization of these products that knowingly cause death in a % of users (more than all other "vaccines combined in history) is willfully and knowingly authorized at great detriment to the publics right to life and health, which is criminal recklessness at worst and gross negligence and best.  As for babies, the authorization violates the rights of children.

The authorization is of a gene therapy mRNA product in which FDAs "current thinking" says it can affect DNA, but the fact is omitted from the fact sheets, violating national and international law.

People are not informed this known fact and significant known risk of DNA being affected causing long term delayed events and cancers.  When our experts speak out about the explosion in cancers and link to mRNA they are censored.

The Commissioner is in breach of FDA's duty to protect the human genome which is the heritage to humanity and as a result of this serious breach the Commissioner has a duty to issue a revocation, moratorium, stay or some preventative measure to stop the injections at this time until matters are settled.

As a matter of strict accordance with law, the FDA's own guidance proves the FDA has no ethical choice but revocation at this time, because they, themselves are clear of the known unpredictable and long term risks. These known risks are not revealed in the fact sheet which legally prevents the marketing, use and EUA of the product, unless the FDA wants to be in violation of FTA false advertising laws, as well as violations of Nuremberg Code and other human rights & international norms which incurs State responsibility, as well as responsibility of the FDA Commissioner.

It violates much more than Federal law that the FDA is failing to inform the public about the risk of death which is a common effect in the fact sheets. For FDA to know a % of people will die yet continue to give the mRNA and gene products to people outside clinical trials without informing people death is listed as common in 1.1% of users is a violation of Nuremberg Code Article 1, 5 and Siracusa Principles 69 (b). It means United States and FDA are violating peoples non derogable rights illegally which incurs State responsibility, as well as responsibility of the FDA Commissioner.

We tried to explain in the June 28, 2022 VBRPAC meeting when we spoke with slides that when FDA violates the international norms it affects other countries that rely on FDA. (FDA used wrong slides after promising to use the correct ones - some key points were omitted by FDA's error to omit the proper slides)

For instance, Costa Rica is the first country in the world to mandate the FDA's emergency use authorization bivalent vaccine 3 doses for 6 months to 5 years, and is using FDA's authorization to do so in an expedited decree, even though the emergency was dropped. The product that FDA is exporting to the wrongdoer country is under EUA and the forced administration of the experimental immune damaging product is violating Nuremberg Code, Siracusa Principles 69 b and EUA laws of the United States.

We are desperately trying to inform FDA they are making a grave error by authorizing this genetic experiment with no informed consent of the risk of ADE, Death being common in phase 4 studies and known risks of DNA being affected causing long term effects and cancers up to 15 years later. 

It is only with the FDA authorization that Costa Rica is engaging in international violations of law by mandating the experiment to 6months and up.   These wrongful acts are the responsibility of FDA authorizing export and not ensuring the product they put into commerce is used within the limits of EUA laws.

The FDA's and CDC’s mislabelled gene therapy experiments called covid-19 vaccines are issued by FDA and therefore USA bears the burden of State responsibility with the WHO and Costa Rica (under Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts) by aiding and abetting international crimes against humanity occurring locally and abroad.

What CDC does affects the world. CDC says "we believe the federal decisions to convert Expanded access use to EUA preempts state law" and that is why the FDA is allowing waivers of informed consent (not allowed by State law) by operating only under Federal laws.

We have to be very clear. NO Federal law is allowed to preempt international human rights norms and that is exactly what is occurring under the commissioner of the FDA's watch.

We wrote to the FDA in regards to these bivalent vaccines to explain exactly which violations of international human rights and peremptory norms the FDA is in violation of. No one will respond and we even spoke with the FDA Commissioners Ombudsman Laurie Linkel and she first promised to help us facilitate communication with FDA's VERPAC communication department. After reading our June 28, 2022 letter that was never taken into consideration when the bivalent vaccines were approved, naming Nuremberg and other violations with evidence we are right, she had decided that *she never said she would help us facilitate communication* and even though her only duty is to facilitate communication within FDA she refuses to pass VERPAC our information that was not considered in regards to the manifest illegalities of the use of the gene therapy outside clinical trials by converting EAU to EUA in an FDA precedent during covid. This conversion from only terminally ill who have no other option to widespread use of gene therapy treatments in healthy people exceeds authority of FDA and is criminally recklessly endangering peoples lives and health.

Arbitrary and more Arbitrary:

"Not only must an agency's decreed result be within the scope of its lawful authority , but the process by which it reaches that result must be logical and rational." Allentown Mack Sales & Serv., Inc. v. NLRB, 522 U.S. 359,374 (1998).

NOT WITHIN LAWFUL AUTHORITY:

Further violations in excess of legal authority regarding this error of authorizing the bivalent in healthy masses and babies under EUA will be the Commissioners direct responsibility.

Criminal charges will be promptly filed in international law if the Commissioner continues to allow these criminal and grave errors of law and fact.

THE PROCESS WHICH REACHED THE RESULT WAS NOT LOGICAL OR RATIONAL:

Paul Offitt and another committee member wisely and ethically voted no and one no should have been enough, considering how many conflicted votes said yes, and considering these are baby experiments with DNA that is so risky FDA says its an unreasonable risk to test on more than a few people at once and 15 years of follow up is needed to know what will happen. Now CDC wants to give experiments to babies and on the childhood schedule?

What happened? The Commissioner has a duty to explain if those facts changed and why this gene therapy bivalent is no longer posing an "unreasonable risk" in masses, when in 2018 the guidance was finalized. How is it no longer an unreasonable risk in 2022?

Even more illogical and irrational is that the FDA guidance (ignored in the June 28 2022 VBRPAC meeting) says that "an immune response to self antigens "

This highly contentious administrative act of authorizing the bivalent [non]vaccines is unconscionable, beyond reckless endangerment and violates the treaty on protecting the rights of the children.

FDA DENIED US DUE PROCESS AND BARRELED FORWARD

FDA said June 28, 2022 would be a very contentious meeting, however, despite knowing it was contentious they did not provide due process to go over or debate any facts. We were given 3 minutes to speak and its not enough time to review these types of extensive scientific or legally based facts in reality.

It appears that the FDA did not consider any of the comments it received about this matter as none were posted to Regulations.gov.

What is important to know:

Indeed, the FDA's rushed approval process is itself compelling evidence of arbitrariness. See United States v. NCR Corp., 911 F. Sup. 2d 767, 773 (E.D. Wis. 2012) ("Capricious means [the agency] rushed through the process or made a sudden, knee-jerk decision without hearing enough evidence."); TOMAC v. Norton, 193 F. Sup. 2d 182, 195 (D.D.C. 2002) ("The fact that the Bureau made its decision in an apparently rushed fashion may be an indication of arbitrary and capricious action ....").

FDA'S AUTHORIZATION BASED ON "A TOTALITY OF EVIDENCE" IS A FRAUD. OUR EVIDENCE WAS NOT CONSIDERED.

The FDA stated in its press release that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective. There is no evidence to support this statement and evidence to the contrary was ignored by FDA. Ignoring the data is quintessentially arbitrary and capricious. See Union of Concerned Scientists v. Nat'! Highway Traffic Safety Comm 'n, No. 19- 1230) 2020 WL 3610284, at 64 (D.C. Cir. June 26, 2020) ("Ignoring evidence that undercuts the agency's judgment is quintessentially arbitrary and capricious") (cleaned up).

Due to the FDA's authorization being based on legal and factual inaccuracies, including those described above and more which are in the attachments, FDA has a duty to find it is appropriate to withdraw the FDA authorizations and approvals of all mRNA products and stay all future framework authorizations without human trials indefinitely.

The FDA Authorization of the gene therapy bivalent and original versions do not accurately reflect the Department’s or FDA’s thinking because it is inconsistent with the FD&C Act, FDA regulations, and judicial precedent, among other legal authorities, and is not supported by the facts. In addition, the FDA Authorization could result in significant harm to public health by suggesting that unsafe or ineffective drugs could circumvent the drug approval process. Additionally, the FDA Authorization is supported by flawed facts. It cites, for the proposition that the product is safe and effective, only a single observational study of 8 mice, which was unsuccessful, which could lead to an overestimation of the benefit of the experiments and an underestimation of potential and known harms.

The FDA Authorization also erroneously ties immune response to "protection" which is irrational and unscientific, as well as creates unreasonable risk in people who can develop auto immune like disorders according to FDA's current thinking in the gene therapy guidance documents. FDA’s regulations on good guidance practices (§ 10.115 (21 CFR 10.115)) are being violated by the issuance of the EUA’s. Under the APA, FDA may use guidance documents in which ‘‘advise the public prospectively of the manner in which the agency proposes to exercise a discretionary power.’’ Accordingly, FDA’s good guidance practice regulations define ‘‘guidance documents’’ to include ‘‘documents that relate to . . . enforcement policies.’’ (§ 10.115(b)(2)).

Another possible option for CDC consideration today is to review the phase 4 data showing death, and review the circumstances and inappropriateness of this EUA, including circumstances of death and ADE in the trial data and serious trial fraud allegations in court now. Pfizer testified the government knows of trial fraud, all of which is willful misconduct obviously warranting revocation of the EUA.

CDC has a duty under human rights norms and law to revoke an EUA if the revocation is appropriate to protect the public health or safety, which CDC and FDA’s own data and court ordered documents conclusively shows death in large numbers are known and maliciously withheld from the public, which is willful misconduct.

Due to the reasons stated, Interest Of Justice opposes The committee advising the Director, CDC, on the use of immunizing agents for COVID-19 products and also opposes the committee mandating to establish and periodically review and, as appropriate, revise the list of vaccines for administration to vaccine-eligible children through the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, along with schedules regarding dosing interval, dosage, and contraindications to administration of vaccines for all COVID-19 Products.

Thank you, Dustin Bryce for Interest of Justice

---

DEAR FREEDOM FIGHTER FRIENDS:

PUBLIC NOTICE: We recently learned from the FDA Ombudsman (then read up and confirmed she is correct) that any public comment given to any ABC agency has no legal effect or force in a contentious situation.

Your comment could carry weight in an honorable system, but failing that, a public comment with evidence that was ignored can possibly only be used in legal cases later, which is why we are very glad people comment in mass, to build a record to use in legal actions after they ignore us all.

PLEASE BE ADVISED THEY DO NOT LEGALLY OWE A RECOGNITION, ANSWER OR RESPONSE if you file officially on regulations.gov.

If you would like to give legal effect and FORCE OF LAW to your evidence and input in a way that CDC, FDA, WHO and the agencies MUST RESPOND TO WITH THEIR EVIDENCE AND SCIENCE PLEASE CONTACT US at evidence@stopcrimesagainsthumanity.org.

(IOJ Team is ready to finish the pile of documents on our desk to file a blitzkrieg of massive positive actions. Some were just filed and in process, about to be announced. We will win this with the proper legal actions and arguments (that HAVE NOT been tried by anyone in the world yet by the way)….

Some legal movements are ALL TALK and NO ROCK. It’s time for the serious actions to start, join us at the tip of the spear.

INTEREST OF JUSTICE IS TAKING MASSIVE GLOBAL LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE WHO, FDA, CDC AND COSTA RICA BABY MANDATES!

JOIN US NOW. ITS TIME TO RISE UP OUR COLLECTIVE VIBRATION.

---

Thanks for reading Interest of Justice! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work.

---

Our Substack and legal work is free for all to access due to the generous support of donors.

It is you, the few donors we have, that singlehandedly make our ongoing legal work against WHO, FDA and Wrongdoer States possible.

---