ESTADO DE EXCEPCIÓN Y "CONTRAMEDIDAS" CONTRA EL COVID-19: EVIDENCIA DE UNA INTENCIÓN DE DAÑAR (LATYPOVA Y WATT)

Alexandra Latypova (Sasha) holds an MBA degree and is a former Pharmaceutical R&D Executive. Sasha spent approximately 25 years in the pharmaceutical industry. She has owned and managed several contract research organisations, conducting clinical trials for over 60 pharmaceutical clients worldwide. She became concerned about the irregularities, cover-up and apparent fraud relating to the extremely high number of deaths and injuries associated with the COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ rollout. 

 

VISIONADOS DE LAS PRESENTACIONES DE Pandemic Strategies: Lessons and Consequences – International Conference in Stockholm 

 

 

 

LATYPOVA AND WATT DETAIL HERE HOW COVID-19 "COUNTERMEASURES", INCLUDING THE VACCINES, WERE DIRECTED BY THE US GOVERNMENT AND "LEGALLY" DESIGNED TO BE EXEMPTED FROM ANY OTHERWISE BINDING REGULATIONS FOR VACCINES, PHARMA PRODUCTS, MANUFACTURER'S LIABILITIES AND SO ON

A SIMILAR SCHEME WAS IN FACT APPLIED BY THE REST OF THE STATES IN THE WORLD, AND ALSO BY THE EU

ACTUAL INTENTS TO CHANGE THE WHO TREATY AND REGULATIONS ARE, IT SEEMS MORE CLEAR NOW, ALSO A "COUNTERMEASURE" TO "EXEMPT" NATIONAL GOVERMENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD FROM ANY LIABILITY CLAIMED BY THEIR WORLDWIDE CITIZENS 

IT CONSTITUTES A TRAGIC EXAMPLE, WORLDWIDE, OF WHAT CARL SCHMITT CALLED "STATE OF EXCEPTION" (German: Ausnahmezustand)

ALTHOUH LATYPOVA LABEL THE "INDUSTRIAL SCHEME" AS BEING "FASCIST", IT SHOULD ALSO BE LABELLED AS A "STATE OF EXCEPTION" FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL POINT OF VIEW

 

A state of exception (German: Ausnahmezustand) is a concept introduced in the 1920s by the German philosopher and jurist Carl Schmitt, similar to a state of emergency (martial law) but based in the sovereign's ability to transcend the rule of law in the name of the public good. 

 

SHE RIGHTLY STATES THAT THE SCHEME MUST FOLLOW ON TO HAVE THE GOVERNMENTS AND THEIR AGENTS EXEMPTED FROM ANY LEGAL CONSEQUENCES.OF ORDINARY LAW

 AT THE END LATYPOVA QUOTES PFIZER'S DEFENSE IN JACKSON'S BROOK CASE (APRIL 2022): "WE DID NOT DEFRAUD THE GOVERNMENT. WE DELIVERED THE "FRAUD" (EXCEPTION) THE GOVERNMENT ORDERED"

IT SHOULD NOW BE MORE THAN CLEAR, WITH OR WITHOUT ANY LEGAL CONSEQUENCES REQUESTED BY ORDINARY LAW

 

 CARL SCHMITT:

3) ELITE ARE THOSE WHO CAN OBLIGE OTHERS TO FULFILL FORMS AND PETITIONS.ELITE ARE THOSE WHO CAN DEMAND INDEMNITIES FROM THEIR VICTIMS

4) ELITE ARE THOSE WHO DO NOT SEEK JUSTICE IN COURTS AND WHO ARE NOT AFRAID OF BEING BROUGHT TO COURT DUE TO THEIR WRONGDOINGS

5) ELITE ARE THOSE WHO DO NOT NEED TO SEEK PASSPORTS FROM THE POLICE

6) ELITE ARE THOSE WHOSE SOCIOLOGY NO ONE DARES TO WRITE. ELITE ARE THOSE WHO CHARGE OTHERS WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT BEING CHARGED BY OTHERS

7) ELITE ARE THOSE WHO CAN RESIST "TU QUOQUE""

CS

(JULY 22, 1948)

TRANSLATION FROM THE SPANISH TRANSLATION BY FERNANDO GONZÁLEZ VIÑAS

 

"Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."

Louis Brandeis

Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States,277 U.S.438 (1928).

"Tanto la decencia, como la seguridad y la libertad exigen que los funcionarios públicos estén sometidos a las mismas reglas de conducta que son obligaciones para el ciudadano. En un gobierno de leyes, la existencia del gobierno se pondrá en peligro si él no observa la ley escrupulosamente.Nuestro gobierno es el potente, el omnipresente maestro. Para bien o para mal el enseña a toda la gente con su ejemplo. El crimen es contagioso. Si el gobierno se convierte en un quebrantador de la ley, él alimenta el resentimiento por la ley; él invita a cada hombre a ser ley por sí mismo; él invita a la anarquía.Declarar que en la administración del derecho penal el fin justifica los medios-declarar que el gobierno puede cometer crímenes para asegurar la condena de un delincuente- traería una terrible consecuencia. A esta doctrina perniciosa este tribunal debería resueltamente hacerle frente."

Louis Brandeis

Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)