Thursday, May 26th

Last update:10:41:26 AM GMT

You are here: Christian Doctrine Health The Nuremberg Code And Covid Fascism

The Nuremberg Code And Covid Fascism

E-mail Print PDF

Covid may, or may not, be an actual new virus. Whether it is real or not, the illness associated with it has been associated with unscrupulous scientists and doctors, who, with power-hungry politicians, have attacked the people with Soviet-Russia style repression and wickedness.

Everything socialist (Marxist or fascist), including ‘Greens’ and Islamists, have seized the opportunity to hammer whole nations into their own image. Their tool of choice is fear. And this extends to a supposed ‘vaccine’ that is not a true vaccine. Now we have this injectable substance, everyone is expected to take it. Businesses refuse jobs to, or sack, anyone who will not be injected, Airlines demand a ‘Covid passport’ to prove one has had the vaccine. Many people look upon those who reject the ‘vaccine’ with disgust. Governments insist that if we do not take the vaccine, we will have to suffer the consequences by not being allowed to do certain things, including taking a holiday. So, intimidation and discrimination is used in abundance.

The whole frenzy is against well-established international rules, called ‘The Nuremberg Code’, which was drawn up for very specific reasons – to stop anyone, whether individually or nationally, from commanding any person to take diagnostic or treatment procedures against their will. The Code was declared in 1946, after the trials of high-ranking Nazis in Nuremberg, Germany. The international court officials, horrified by medical experiments done on Jews in particular, all agreed that nothing like it must ever be allowed again. Now, in 2021, demands are being made for all people to receive the Covid vaccine, even though it is not even a vaccine. Those who refuse it are castigated and made objects of both fear and antagonism.

The Covid injection is blatantly a research trial and not a proven medical device. It has not been tested – except in those who take the injection, so they are guinea pigs without knowing it! There have been many casualties and some deaths after people have been ‘vaccinated’ in just a month So, many people are afraid to have it. But, they are also fearful of public reaction, retribution, and government intimidation.

From the mid-1920s German doctors began to do unethical researches, some of them to do with eugenics and race. Soon, the German government advocated racial cleansing, so that ‘inferior’ races were eliminated in favour of the ‘pure’ Aryan race. That is why millions were burnt to cinders or shot in concentration camps. Of course, no prisoner could give consent to these hideous researches and many were horribly deformed or killed during them. At the Nuremberg trial judges and others determined that never again would people be subjected to researches and procedures they had not consented to. Yet, just 75 years later, governments are using fear to intimidate people into taking a substance that is untried and with no known results. This means they are acting against the Nuremberg Code.

The Nuremberg Code

The part of the verdict to do with experiments and treatments, says:

  1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

  2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

  3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

  4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

  5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an ’a priori’ reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

  6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

  7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

  8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

  9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

  10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Now let me comment on each:

  1. The Covid vaccine is very much an experiment and has not undergone stringent testing; future medical problems with it are unknown, and the injection does not stop people getting Covid.

  2. There are no fruitful results – any supposed outcomes are computer predictions. And too many have already suffered, with some dying… so far.

  3. There is no animal experimentation and there is insufficient knowledge of the supposed virus to enable any rational person to devise or take the injection.

  4. There have been suffering, injury and deaths from the start.

  5. The makers of the ‘vaccine’ have already said they expect casualties – but do not know how many. Some estimate just short of one million deaths or serious injury. The Code says that any such risks are acceptable if the medical researchers are also the subjects of experimentation… but, with Covid, they are not!

  6. The worth of the injected substance has NOT been proved to be worth any risks. Indeed, the virus is relatively weak and almost exclusively attacks those with weak immune systems and preconditions, and those who are older. There is, then, no actual need or necessity for a vaccine.

  7. The danger of death, serious consequences and injuries are factored into the vaccine, so any death etc., is a deliberate act by the vaccine makers. Note that the Code refers to “even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.” This is why some countries either refuse the vaccine or have stopped a vaccine program.

  8. Yes, those involved in research are qualified to do so, but they have issued a vaccine that has not been tested (normally this takes about 4-10 years) and outcomes are unknown. Yet, though there have already been deaths and danger the vaccines have not been recalled or stopped. It means that researchers and governments are deliberately putting lives in jeopardy.

  9. Human subjects are unaware of the dangers, so this clause cannot be complied with. Others have been convinced by governments that vaccines are safe. No-one is given advice that there could be danger or death. So, liberty to choose otherwise is hidden or covered by fear and misinformation by government and billionaires like Bill Gates, who is just one influential figure who calls for depopulation. He has also said that a vaccine would be a good medium to use to cull big numbers of people.

  10. Researchers and governments have not complied with this clause either. They continue to give the vaccine despite deaths and injuries and life-changing serious side effects even in the first few weeks of administration!

The Nuremberg Code has been followed by a number of similar declarations, such as the Belmont Report, 1978. The Geneva Declaration followed in 1948, though its principles began during WW2. It was published by the World Medical Association and its clauses are clearly not adhered to by today’s Covid researchers and doctors. It states that doctors will observe the following:

  • I SOLEMNLY PLEDGE to dedicate my life to the service of humanity;
  • THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF MY PATIENT will be my first consideration;
  • I WILL RESPECT the autonomy and dignity of my patient;
  • I WILL MAINTAIN the utmost respect for human life;
  • I WILL NOT PERMIT considerations of age, disease or disability, creed, ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political affiliation, race, sexual orientation, social standing or any other factor to intervene between my duty and my patient;
  • I WILL RESPECT the secrets that are confided in me, even after the patient has died;
  • I WILL PRACTICE my profession with conscience and dignity and in accordance with good medical practice;
  • I WILL FOSTER the honour and noble traditions of the medical profession;
  • I WILL GIVE to my teachers, colleagues, and students the respect and gratitude that is their due;
  • I WILL SHARE my medical knowledge for the benefit of the patient and the advancement of healthcare;
  • I WILL ATTEND TO my own health, well-being, and abilities in order to provide care of the highest standard;
  • I WILL NOT USE my medical knowledge to violate human rights and civil liberties, even under threat;
  • I MAKE THESE PROMISES solemnly, freely and upon my honour.

Rather than follow their own ethical rules, doctors are divided into those who mimic governmental demands and false researches, and those who are honest and have no personal gain from such researches and practices. I have already reported elsewhere of the way the UK NHS has radically changed views on older people and those who ‘take up space’ in hospitals.

We also have the Declaration of Helsinki, 2013. It is seen as a vital reference for research ethics, and is said to override any national or local laws or regulations. Yet, many doctors and researchers are so in thrall to governments they do not follow the most basic rule – to do no harm.

The Green Report is also a valid reference, written by Andrew Conway Ivy, who was appalled when prisons conducted experiments on prisoners in the USA. Ivy reminded governors of the Nuremberg Code at the famous trial of Nazis, which he had attended as a witness.

We have a much older code – the Hippocratic Oath (later version, 245 AD) taken by doctors. The first version supposedly contained the words “First do no harm”. There is some debate as to whether the Oath was by Hippocrates or not, but that is beside the point. Today, some doctors question whether they can uphold the oath! This should cause anxiety in us all.

Linked to these medical rules or ethics are the Hague Ethical Guidelines set up for the chemical sciences. They are relevant because the vaccination is the result of pharmacological research. There are other declarations that uphold ethical behaviour when diagnosing or treating people, but all are being trounced by unscrupulous doctors, researchers and governments. Those who speak out are shut-down and silenced.

People without a good education can be excused for following what governments and doctors tell them, but I am truly amazed that intelligent people with the ability to compare and examine claims, simply take the Covid vaccine, recklessly putting their own lives at risk and potentially altering their DNA, with unknown future outcomes. But, more than that, I abhor the way the vaccine is being used as a weapon not just by governments, but by doctors and commercial companies. Soon people who refuse a vaccine will be literally hated and treated with suspicion by those who are foolish enough to take it. Then will come true fascist intimidation not just from governments but by ordinary people.

© March 2021

Published on

Bible Theology Ministries - PO Box 415, Swansea, SA5 8YH
United Kingdom