That which is law matter on what it is to doctor – that was already there in the 1300s, defined then, as scholar and title for such learning and achievement. What became of the term doctor in the 1700s for the criminal intent, of altering, modifying, in a deceptive or false manner, that, and adding something harmful to food and drink and such. The medicos, that was their doing – and any talk of that, they thought they could use titles and claimed scholastic studies, that were gobbledegook, to shush and tirade against anyone whom talked of doctors doing such crimes. Meanwhile there were doctors giving lectures on ‘stools’ and talking about poop, and their poisons they had to make people poop, or prevent people pooping – and the people didn’t want to listen to that, and they certainly didn’t want their children indoctrinated into the doctor’s regimes of such administering of poisons. Doctors suggesting arsenic, a known poison was good for the digestion, or as a depository. Utter horror when people were taken by force and subjected to very experiments like that, to distract from the homestead the Doctor ordered to be burnt down, because the family there were talking about the crimes the medico-doctor had inflicted.
If only that were all history. If only the medico doctor had not increased their horrifying experiments on the population. If only the medico doctor were not ordering the politicians, and the people around, and demanding the main-stream media do false and misleading journalism, that is hostile propaganda to the people of Australia, advertising for the medico-pharmaceutical scams, racketeers, and their scandalous improper intentions to violate the population, and murder the people that speak out against them.
The doctoring of language, and laws, and what is reasonable for a population to be asked to adhere to. When law is inverted, it is not reasonable, and people are asked to do all sorts of ridiculous, useless and dangerous tasks, so that horrible sabotage can be inflicted on industry and people. It’s never a good thing to demand a person conceal, or cover for a medico.
When people stand up to medicos, and say – no I’m not going to cover my mouth for you, I’m going to tell on you. Standing up to medicos, saying you won’t wear their surgical masks, in a ridiculous charade, to emulate medico situations in surgeries, or toxic laboratories, or any of those places where crimes take places and medico-pharmaceutical companies want to conceal their toxins going into the environment, when they’ve signed contracts to say that this will not occur. For medicos then to cause a decoy, point at a person and say they’re a medical problem because they’re talking too much. That person cannot somehow be the same as the medico-pharmaceutical toxic leak into the air, that then gets lost to follow up. So, how did that get, switched? Really horrible practiced deceit of that which the medico-pharmaceutical industries do.
That of restoring or repairing to a working condition, that pertains to a machine, or the corruption of an organisation, needing be given work to repair the corrosion, or corruption. That the medico-doctor has taken that language, and laws regarding dangerous machines and equipment, and attempted to apply what can only be applied to a machine, or the function of an organisation – to people, as if people are a function of a medico machine, or the medico-pharmaceutical organisation.
A debatable notion is to treat with poisons and name that medicine – to alter, modify and deceive or give false manner to that which is said to be for a therapeutic effect. That which medico-pharmaceutical companies claim to be able to do, and claim people for, is scandalous, and it is horrifying how many people have been murdered by medico stealth, as part of a medico-pharmaceutical treatment regime.
Medicos talk of ‘carriers’ of this and that. They’re making stuff up, and when there’s no reasonable proof of what the medico is saying, then, there’s no way to prove a person a ‘carrier’ of anything other than their own person. What is overtly a carriage issue, is what is needed. A dock receipt is maritime carrier, to evidence the delivery, and such should not be cobbled into medical muck, and say that people being treated by medicos are goods at the dock. The crime of such attempts to conceal has to be detected.
If customs staff fail to do their jobs, that can be a potential harm to themselves or others – but it is not for a medical office to declare such, and turn employment into medicalisation. Hazards and carriage, that are unacceptable as cargo, that, and what might pertain to spies evasion, and doctrine of entireties, treason and terrorism – is not something a medico can inspect, given the medico and the pharmacist needs to be watched, and it is important that division is kept between the watch, the inspectors, and the potential dangerous criminal intent of medico-pharmaceutical imports and exports, and people being murdered by medical-pharmaceutical stealth.
The doctrine of doing and allowing, for poisoners that are of the medical office to cause harm to others; is such as to say that there must be more stringent prohibition on harming, than on failing to prevent harm. The poisoners and their poisons must be contained and any conspiracy to murder detected and stopped, before what has been conspired, is acted on.
Medico claims of preventing harm, therefore, are not only false and misleading, they’re misdirected, at a person that is being exploited as a decoy. Medico claims of saving lives, are false, and misdirected. What is important is that medicos are prohibited and strictly watched, to prohibit medicos from murder. Medicos do not prevent murder, that is policing, that does that. There can be no medical assessment that can be corrections orientated, without that medical assessment being a crime in itself, that of slander and libel. To name a person a harm to self, is not a crime. To name a person a harm to others, there has to be police evidence, and then, the person has to have acted on the evidence of their conspired intention to murder, to ever be detained by police. There has to be actual evidence, of a person’s intention to perpetrate serious crime.
Any medico-pharmaceutical rhetoric on preventing harm, particularly from psychiatrists, is false and misleading, when the provisions purported by the medico to be the prevention, are directly responsible for deaths. The prohibition must be on murder and manslaughter and killing a human – and that far more strict than any responsibility for letting a person die. The medico is out of sorts with reason in their rhetoric of ‘disease prevention’, and what ‘harm’ actually is. Medicos used to take an oath to ‘do no harm’, they’ve perverted that for so long, the medicos, that they no longer even take that oath. Got called hypocrites, because that’s what they are, when they say they won’t harm, and they deliberately poison a person to death slowly over a decade or more, and take notes on how the poison destroyed the person’s life and livelihood, then, attempt to say the effects of the poison were the ‘disease’ that the medicos couldn’t prevent. The cheek of the medico then to ask for funding, and cite the effects of their poisons on the people they murdered, just outrageous!
That police are employed to stop murderers, from murdering – that is their employment to prohibit murder and, and not cower from the responsibility or collude with murderers. That’s the doctrine here, of doing and allowing – there as legal understanding to prohibit the medical office, that of medical practitioners and their employees from murdering people.
The medico-pharmaceutical personnel must be controlled, watched, and prevented from harming people – for reasons of peace, order and good governance. That in preventing the medical office and personnel, from murder – the doctrine of double effect applies, in that police (in self-defence against a medico) must end the medico’s life, to preserve police lives, and the lives of other people in the community, whom the medico has intention to murder, or has attempted to murder slowly by stealth weapons such as poisons that medicos are handlers of.
Think of how the doctrine of double effect is justified when a psychiatrist is known to be a violent attacker, that has brutally enslaved, tortured and murdered people, a psychiatrist with dangerous weapons that interfere with police radar systems and logistics and customs. A psychiatrist whom like other medicos is armed with extremely dangerous equipment that includes satellite and security management equipment, poisons, radiative equipment, electro-magnetic emitters, interference devices, various dangerous gases – that challenge security management, police and the military. That the doctrine of double effect applied here, in self-defence and in defence of people being attacked by psychiatrists – self-defence against a medico, that of ending a medico’s life, is a necessary action.
Comments