This is the reply that was sent to the above linked to, and opposing blog. However, as always editor no identity Costner, will never publish; as it again contains to much truth.
Your claim that pharmaceutical companies can be sued; is
entirely false, Mr. Editor. In most any court you can file a lawsuit for almost
anything; however that does not mean that the plaintiff can actually be
successfully sued. If you know anything about the courts legal system; you
would realize that a precedence was set by the Bruesewitz case. Meaning that
any such cases that follow it if they are filed, will strongly be influenced by
and determined by any previous precedence in a similar case that has been set.
So, quite obviously if with the clearly good merits that the Bruesewitz case
had, they were not successful; then there is little to no chance that any other
such case filed will have any better luck. Those types of cases against the
vaccine manufacturer, are clearly preempted by the existence of the NCVIA. So,
in reality and at this point, no parent of a vaccine damaged child is going to
ever again pursue the avenue that the Bruesewitz family did against such as
Wyeth. Common sense should tell you that Mr. Editor. That family spent over a
decade chasing that claim and came up with no compensation. If you call that
justice, then something is way wrong with you.
In reality here you are being flat out intellectually
dishonest, to yet claim that a vaccine maker can be sued for anything, ever.
They are quite obviously. immune to any lawsuits of any kind from a parent of a
vaccine damaged child.
BRUESEWITZ ET AL. v. WYETH FKA WYETH, INC.,ET AL.
Excerpt:
Held: The NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims
against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for
injury
or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects. Pp. 7–19.
NVIC Cites "Betrayal" of Consumers by U.S. Supreme
Court Decision Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma
Excerpt: Hannah Bruesewitz was brain injured by DPT vaccine
as a child but she was denied compensation by the U.S. Court of Claims, which administers
the federal vaccine injury compensation program created by the 1986 Act that
has turned away two out of three plaintiffs. Her attorneys then sued in civil
court, providing evidence that Wyeth-Lederle had the technology to produce a
less reactive, purified pertussis vaccine but declined to do so.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has removed all financial incentive
for multi-national pharmaceutical corporations, which enjoy a $20 billion
dollar business, to make vaccines as safe as they can be,” said Fisher. “This
is a sad day for all Americans forced by law to use dozens of doses of vaccines
or be barred from school or health insurance or employment. The only leverage
left to American consumers to ensure that vaccines with the fewest health risks
are produced is to oppose vaccine mandates and work to defend vaccine
exemptions in all public health laws.”
The Latest in Atrocious Supreme Court Decisions - Only 2
Justices Stand Up for Your Rights...
Vaccination Profiteers Gang Up on Hannah Bruesewitz - In
Supreme Court
Excerpt: The Court took the Bruesewitz case to determine
whether 18-year-old Hannah, disabled by injuries she received from Wyeth’s
diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DPT) vaccine at 6-months-old in 1992, has
the right to bring a lawsuit against Wyeth after the Vaccine Court, set up by
the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, refused compensation even
though she will require life-long care and her vaccine was traced to a lot that
had 65 adverse reactions including two deaths, 39 emergency room visits, and 6
hospitalizations.
No Pharma Liability? No Vaccine Mandates, March 3, 2011
YOUR CHILDS DEATH WILL BE A COINCIDENCE AND NO ONE IS LIABLE
Global vaccine market now exceeds $20B
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/global-vaccine-market-now-exceeds-20b--------------
I wish to address one other matter as well, and will be directly.
This involves some replies by character name on that blog, Dakota James, and is on again this mindless and dimwitted blog page right here. One mans obsession with me for now since the summer of 2010, and some now over 80 blog pages of personal attack, on me.
Is Lowell Hubbs' "Vacfacts.info" Anti-Vaccination Website Gone?
http://vaccineconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com/2012/08/is-lowell-hubbs-vacfactsinfo-anti.html
This is a copy of the statement and claims made in so called Dakota James reply on that said page.
Dakota James, September 24, 2012 9:29 PM
It looks like Lowell is having some landlord issues:
https://www.facebook.com/lowell.hubbs/posts/4578538663244?notif_t=feed_comment
https://www.facebook.com/lowell.hubbs/posts/4578600224783?notif_t=feed_comment
And for more reassurance of his sickening obsession with children, he went as far as to list LS Magazine as his employer!
FYI, you must be logged into Facebook to view his "Info" page:
http://www.facebook.com/lowell.hubbs/info
Ref: Wikipedia article of the 2004 Child Pornography raids listing LS Magazine as a manufacturer and distributor of child porn media:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Ukrainian_child_pornography_raids
-------------
This is the reply I made and as well quite obviously will never be published, in my defense, and nor in the defense of myself personally.
Your claim that pharmaceutical companies can be sued; is
entirely false, Mr. Editor. In most any court you can file a lawsuit for almost
anything; however that does not mean that the plaintiff can actually be
successfully sued. If you know anything about the courts legal system; you
would realize that a precedence was set by the Bruesewitz case. Meaning that
any such cases that follow it if they are filed, will strongly be influenced by
and determined by any previous precedence in a similar case that has been set.
So, quite obviously if with the clearly good merits that the Bruesewitz case
had, they were not successful; then there is little to no chance that any other
such case filed will have any better luck. Those types of cases against the
vaccine manufacturer, are clearly preempted by the existence of the NCVIA. So,
in reality and at this point, no parent of a vaccine damaged child is going to
ever again pursue the avenue that the Bruesewitz family did against such as
Wyeth. Common sense should tell you that Mr. Editor. That family spent over a
decade chasing that claim and came up with no compensation. If you call that
justice, then something is way wrong with you.
In reality here you are being flat out intellectually
dishonest, to yet claim that a vaccine maker can be sued for anything, ever.
They are quite obviously. immune to any lawsuits of any kind from a parent of a
vaccine damaged child.
BRUESEWITZ ET AL. v. WYETH FKA WYETH, INC.,ET AL.
Excerpt:
Held: The NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims
against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for
injury
or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects. Pp. 7–19.
NVIC Cites "Betrayal" of Consumers by U.S. Supreme
Court Decision Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma
Excerpt: Hannah Bruesewitz was brain injured by DPT vaccine
as a child but she was denied compensation by the U.S. Court of Claims, which administers
the federal vaccine injury compensation program created by the 1986 Act that
has turned away two out of three plaintiffs. Her attorneys then sued in civil
court, providing evidence that Wyeth-Lederle had the technology to produce a
less reactive, purified pertussis vaccine but declined to do so.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has removed all financial incentive
for multi-national pharmaceutical corporations, which enjoy a $20 billion
dollar business, to make vaccines as safe as they can be,” said Fisher. “This
is a sad day for all Americans forced by law to use dozens of doses of vaccines
or be barred from school or health insurance or employment. The only leverage
left to American consumers to ensure that vaccines with the fewest health risks
are produced is to oppose vaccine mandates and work to defend vaccine
exemptions in all public health laws.”
The Latest in Atrocious Supreme Court Decisions - Only 2
Justices Stand Up for Your Rights...
Vaccination Profiteers Gang Up on Hannah Bruesewitz - In
Supreme Court
Excerpt: The Court took the Bruesewitz case to determine
whether 18-year-old Hannah, disabled by injuries she received from Wyeth’s
diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DPT) vaccine at 6-months-old in 1992, has
the right to bring a lawsuit against Wyeth after the Vaccine Court, set up by
the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, refused compensation even
though she will require life-long care and her vaccine was traced to a lot that
had 65 adverse reactions including two deaths, 39 emergency room visits, and 6
hospitalizations.
No Pharma Liability? No Vaccine Mandates, March 3, 2011
YOUR CHILDS DEATH WILL BE A COINCIDENCE AND NO ONE IS LIABLE
Global vaccine market now exceeds $20B
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/global-vaccine-market-now-exceeds-20b