Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author.
On August 20th, 1947, judges delivered a verdict against Rudolph Brandt and 22 other Nazis deemed war criminals. It outlawed human experimentation without consent and became the preamble for the Nuremberg Code.
Tragically, this ten-pointed code was largely ignored during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, not to mention the proposed implementation of the Green New Deal. Perhaps the greatest victims are our young people, especially our children.
“Teachers say most children are now two years behind developmentally, toddlers are taking longer to speak,” Jackson Elliott related in a scathing assessment of mask mandates. In his recent Epoch Times article, Elliott identified teachers across America who admitted that the “lockdown generation” reflected “fewer friends and slower minds, while the youngest don’t seem to feel the urge to make friends at all.”
Rachel Garcia, a bilingual speech-language pathologist summed it up. ” One of the biggest differences is the number of kids who have no language.” Garcia works with 1-to 3-year-old children in Palm Desert, California. She noted that children three and under were not learning to talk.
“I’ve been seeing a lot more of those kids who are two and three years old and have no words,” Garcia added. “That is my experience, more than in previous non-COVID years.” She concluded that the root of the problem rested with “devastating isolation from other children.”
In many instances, lockdown children go years without seeing another child. The result: meeting another human being for the first time terrifies them. One child reportedly cried for a half-hour when meeting Garcia.
“He got put in a room with me and spent the next 30 minutes crying his eyes out because he was terrified,” she recalled. “There is another person who is not Mom!”
There has been minimal pushback from the corporate media about such findings. When One America News introduced 13vdoctors from all parts of the country who questioned the effectiveness of masking, they were ridiculed and chastised, ultimately branded conspiracy theorists. In short, OAN bucked the narrative!
Few will forget the heavy-handed vaccine mandates. Hundreds of thousands of Americans lost their jobs, either from forced resignations to outright terminations because they refused to take an experimental drug. The inconsistencies of those implementing the vaccines gradually became common knowledge. As time passed, we witnessed that these vaccines were hardly more than a shot with no guarantee of COVID prevention. President Joe Biden himself can attest to as much!
Then there are the findings introduced by lawmakers Louie Gohmert, Ted Cruz and Bill Posey. Unanswered is the question, “why the urgency to rush authorization of the experimental vaccine for young children?” It has been proven that those under 25 years of age are least likely to experience life-threatening symptoms from the virus.
Equally disquieting is the fact that those refusing the vaccine have been wrongly maligned. In many places in the U.S., those who declined the COVID-19 vaccines have been discriminated against, stigmatized, and marginalized from society. Doctors who dared question the safety and necessity of the vaccines are threatened with the loss of their medical licenses, deleted from social media, and fired from their jobs.
This type of “dogmatism” is likewise seen in what economist Mark Hendrickson described as “the social cost of carbon.”
“In the briefest terms, the social cost of carbon metric is designed to try to quantify in economic terms what economists call an ‘externality’- in this case, the economic impact(past, present, and future) of human emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere contributing to climate change,” Hendrickson explained.
It’s not surprising that the Biden Administration is on board the “social cost of carbon” train. Yet, the model utilized to arrive at these conclusions is riddled with contradictions.
The cost-benefit analysis relies more on assumptions than actual calculations. Then there are the “greenhouse gases” which push for a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, which include obvious biases demonstrated in their word “choices.” This is confirmed by the singling out of carbon, despite the fact that water vapor is by far the most impactful gas.
Unmentioned is the “greening of the planet” resulting from the human-assisted CO2 enrichment of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past five decades. According to climate change expert Bjorn Lomborg, the land “greened” is equivalent to “three Great Britains per year.”
In actuality, warming weather leads to longer growing seasons, providing an increase in potential agricultural production. Former Idaho Congressman Curtis Bowers told me that this amounted to a “fifteen or twenty-mile band” mostly in Canada and Russia that would transform from a mostly useless boreal to land that would be conducive for growing spring wheat.
According to the English medical journal The Lancet, “cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather.”
Unmentioned is the question of IF climate change alarmists are taking into consideration “the social cost of carbon.” They are apparently discounting the rapidly rising costs that Americans are feeling with the skyrocketing energy costs and the worst inflation seen in nearly 50 years. The Biden Administration suggests that these high prices are well worth the benefit. But are they?
The reduced standard of living resulting from anti-fossil fuel policies can involve enormous unforeseen costs. The anti-fossil fuel policies will unquestionably result in increased poverty in America and the world! Worse still, it’s not a mathematical certainty that this entire Green New Deal ideology is nothing more than a ruse to attempt to slip Marxism through the back door.
Marxists like control. “In their minds, they know what is good and right,” Florida Senator, Marco Rubio acknowledged at the most recent CPAC convention. Whether it’s confining people to their homes, mandating the masking of their children, or using climate change directives to lower their standard of living, their argument remains the same: It’s for the overall good of humanity.
In an insightful article published by the Philadelphia Trumpet in August 2017, “better than 31,000 U.S. Scientists signed a petition saying that ‘there is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gasses are causing or will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the earth’s climate.'” Among these scientists were two Nobel Prize-winning physicists, four astronauts, and 9,000 Ph.D.’s.
The question becomes, whatever gave government the authority to impose such actions? From mask mandates, lockdowns, and forced use of experimental vaccines to draconian fuel emission standards that are based on unsubstantiated conclusions, all equate to a government gone berserk! The victims are our people, most notably our young people and our children.
Hendrickson added, “The notion that government should impoverish actual human beings as a means of promoting the ‘welfare of humanity’ is a pagan superstition on par with sacrificing individuals to the sun god.”
To assert that there must be “accountability” is an understatement! These measures have caused pain, to the point of mental alteration, impoverishment and death. And the measures were implemented in many, if not most cases, without permission from the victims.
This is why there should be a serious discussion on the question of IF the authors and perpetrators violated any and all of the ten points of the Nuremberg Code. From preliminary observation, it appears that numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 9 were all violated. If these findings are confirmed, the authors and perpetrators should be punished accordingly.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.