Thursday, 24 February 2011

A Failure of Leadership

I am getting very angry with those people in charge of 'the people' in today's world. Case in point, with some background.

In the late '80s, under mounting people pressure, the U.S. Congress passed a law that said that parents who felt that vaccines had damaged their children could (a) take their case to a special federal Vaccine Court, for a possible compensation claim to be awarded (if they were able to meet strict criteria; set ultimately by...the pharmaceutical industry, as defendant); and only then, if they felt that justice had not been served, could they (b) take their case to a state court, for a trial, in front of a jury of peers, in relation to an unsafe product. People have tried to do just that. They have been blocked in their litigation endeavours by the pharmaceutical industry, whose lawyers could have given Stonewall Jackson a run for his money. Such a case recently made it to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court (which, not so incidentally, somewhat recently ruled in another case that corporations are 'people', in terms of their ability to contribute to political campaigns; a ruling which has made real people now have to compete with deep-pocketed corporations in the political arena) has decided, in all its august majesty, that the people can go hang.

Now let me clarify. This is a ruling not just using its power to 'interpret' the Constitution. That is a judicial-political battle in its own right, pitting staunch constitutionalists, aka 'strict constructionists', against those legal beagles of a more liberal bent, who believe in 'a living Constitution', whereby the document - the contract, between the several States and the federal government - is rendered susceptible to changing attitudes, whereby it can be changed by 'broad interpretation'. That is one debate. This decision is something else entirely. The decision just made the Supreme Court - the judicial branch of the tripartite system of government in the U.S.- over into both that branch AND THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of government.

They just, simply, changed the law. On their own. No semblance of 'interpretation'. Just blatant, outright declaration: I am the Law, and what I say goes.

What are the details.

Recall that, by the law passed by Congress in the late '80s, parents could take their case to their state court only once they had exhausted their attempts at justice in the federal, Vaccine Court. (In which, unlike a 'real' court, you do not have benefit of discovery. You make your case on the merits of your case - of how it fits a cookie-cutter profile, established by the pharmaceutical industry for their products, and agreed to by the federal public health authorities - and that's it.) So, in this case, that was done. And now, the Supreme Court of the land, in all its black-robed sartorial splendour, has decreed that, since vaccines, by their nature, are "unavoidably unsafe", they don't have to be held against law regarding normal, everyday product safety. Next case, please.

-Uh - just a minute. Run that one by me again, will you?

The essence: The Supreme Court is supposed to rule on the constitutionality or not of legislation. It makes no difference what it says or does not say about laws in general. If it's not a constitutional issue, the law is the law. The Supreme Court can't make law. That's not its business.

But it has made it so.

It didn't like the law, because the law left the pharmaceutical corporations liable to lawsuit/product damage claims.

So it huffed itself up, and declared that THEY CAN'T BE SUED FOR A DANGEROUS PRODUCT.

Because their product is "unavoidably unsafe".

I wish I were making this up.

I'm not.

Can you begin to appreciate the enormity of this declaration? There is now no limit for how unsafe a particular vaccine product may be. They don't have to prove any safety factor at all, or be forced to make their products any safer. There is, thus, no incentive TO make their vaccine products safer. Without being able to sue the manufacturer for their unsafe product, as a last recourse, a parent has no recourse to justice.

Oh, and still are required to line up their children for their shots, in order to get them registered into school. And adults need to take them depending on employment interests. And...

...and I have just pinched myself; and this is not a bad dream. I am not making this up.

If there were ever a cause for insurrection, this is one.

And P.S. As another indication of just how bad this whole thing is, it turns out that only a very small percentage of claims in the Vaccine Court are ever allowed. One. And two: If you make the mistake of claiming the injury as "autism" instead of "encephalopathy" (brain damage in general; not to be defined more specifically), you are sure to fail in getting any compensation. Because if the government ever admitted - had to admit - that vaccines can cause autism, the federal government would be paying out huge amounts over the course of the lives of these damaged children.

And the government authorities can't have that happening.

Because it would leave them with egg on their faces, for not having done a proper job of oversight.

The poor dears.

In the meantime, as An Educated Mother said on one comment thread on this matter: 'The game is rigged against the family prevailing. It is a travesty."


But justice will prevail. Once this current batch of 'leaders' is out of the way.

And the 'A' team comes marching in.

To take over. And clean house.


For a new era of leadership to descend on Earth.

Just waiting, now, to take over.

And with decisions like this one, from the highest court in the land, indicating the degree of corruption that has taken over in the current state of being, it can't be long now.

It's like a rotten fruit, about to fall, almost of its own accord.

Good riddance.

No comments: