News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

(LifeSiteNews) – A group that includes former Pfizer vice president Dr. Michael Yeadon filed a complaint with the International Criminal Court (ICC) on behalf of UK citizens against Boris Johnson and UK officials, Bill and Melinda Gates, chief executives of Big Pharma companies, World Economic Forum executive chairman Klaus Schwab, and others for crimes against humanity.

The UK group, including an astrophysicist and a funeral director, additionally charged Dr. Anthony Fauci; Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO);  June Raine, chief executive of Medicines and Healthcare products regulatory agency (MHRA); Dr. Radiv Shah, president of the Rockefeller Foundation; and Dr. Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance,  as “responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code … war crimes and crimes of aggression” in the UK and other countries.

After repeated unsuccessful attempts to raise a case with the English Court system, the applicants resorted to calling with “the utmost urgency” for the ICC “to stop the rollout of COVID vaccinations, introduction of unlawful vaccination passports and all other types of illegal warfare … being waged against the people of the UK.”

In the group’s complaint filed December 6, they present evidence that COVID-19 “vaccines” are in fact experimental gene therapies engineered with gain-of-function research from bat coronaviruses, arguing that these “vaccines” have caused massive death and injury and that the UK government has failed to investigate such reported deaths and injuries; that COVID case and death numbers have been artificially inflated; that face masks are harmful due to hypoxia, hypercapnia and other causes; and PCR tests are “completely unreliable” and “contain carcinogenic ethylene oxide.”

They furthermore argued that effective treatments for COVID-19 such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, were suppressed, leading to a greater death toll from COVID-19 than what should have occurred.

They make the case that the lockdowns were enacted under the pretext of artificially inflated infection and death numbers from an engineered virus, as well as the experimental “vaccines” have resulted in:

Massive short-term damage and death, with at least 395,049 reported adverse reactions to COVID “vaccines” in the UK alone; a sharp uptick in ChildLine calls from vulnerable children during lockdowns; “destruction of wealth and businesses” through imposed lockdowns;” “severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law,” including bans on travel and gatherings, and forced quarantine and self-isolation; apartheid due to segregation by vaccine passport possession; and “expected reduction in fertility” after “vaccination,” among other harmful physical and psychological effects.

In addition, the applicants maintain that “the suppression of safe and effective alternative treatments for Covid-19 amounts to murder and warrants a full investigation by the court.” They noted that besides censorship of online information on and promotion of these alternative treatments, “some academic journals are blocking the publication of studies showing the effectiveness of drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.”

The applicants also cited quotes from Holocaust survivors who have drawn “stark parallels between Covid restrictions and the beginning of the Holocaust.” In an open letter, the Holocaust survivors have asked medical regulatory authorities  to “stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately,” which they maintain violates the Nuremberg Code.

They even allege that “another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes.” One survivor, Vera Sharav, noted in an interview cited in the complaint,

“The stark lesson of the Holocaust is that whenever doctors join forces with government and deviate from their personal, professional, clinical commitment to do no harm to the individual, medicine can then be perverted from a healing, humanitarian profession to a murderous apparatus.”

“What sets the Holocaust apart from all other mass genocides is the pivotal role played by the medical establishment, the entire medical establishment. Every step of the murderous process was endorsed by the academic, professional medical establishment. Medical doctors and prestigious medical societies and institutions lent the veneer of legitimacy to infanticide, mass murder of civilians.”

According to the applicants, all of the damaging consequences of the “vaccines,” lockdown and virus meet the criteria for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes against the people of the UK, because the guilty “members of the UK government and world leaders have both knowledge and intent with respect to these alleged crimes.”

In fact, they argue that the destructive consequences of the “vaccines,” lockdowns and engineered virus are deliberate attempts at depopulation and societal destabilization as part of a globally coordinated plan to consolidate wealth and power in the hands of a few.

They argue that these measures therefore also constitute a “crime of aggression,” that is, the effort “effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State.” In this case, they claim, the goal is to “dismantl[e] all the Democratic Nation States, step by step,” and to “destroy small and medium sized businesses, moving the market shares to the largest corporations,” owned by the ultra-rich, to give this “elite” group greater political and monetary control.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.