Guest post by Wings for Liberty and Justice
Happy 247th Birthday America! As we celebrate over the 4th of July, we are reminded of our heritage. The USA began with 56 courageous founding fathers signing The Declaration of Independence. We have the blessings of liberty because of their courage and others who have sacrificed over these nearly 250 years for our freedom. But our foundational freedoms are now threatened. Our free medical choices to choose our doctor, choose which prescribed medical treatments, choose our prescriptions, and informed consent are now being directly threatened.
These last 3 years of the COVID Coronavirus Pandemic have been extremely difficult for our nation and its citizens. Here is part of our true story.
Our small group of current and former United Airlines employees are standing-up for our fellow United Airlines employees and for all Americans. Our group is seeking justice against the unlawful and unconstitutional “vaccine mandate” imposed by United Airlines in August 2021. We are pilots, flight attendants, customer service agents, mechanics, and ramp agents who bravely stood together against United Airlines and refused to be bullied into violating our beliefs and injecting experimental gene therapy shots into our bodies.
The choice between “Jab or Job” violated our rights. For those, like us, who refused to forfeit our rights and discard our convictions, the repercussions of United Airlines’ vaccine mandate’, were harsh. United Airlines began with incentives to employees – if they got the shot, they got some bonus, but soon, those incentives turned into coercion and outright threats. We were mocked by our CEO, we were singled-out and exposed by our leadership. We were socially indicted through outlandish actions, and we were openly subjected to discrimination. When we filed for and were granted religious exemptions (which is our right to do) we were either placed on indefinite unpaid leave of absence or in some cases terminated. It appeared that United Airlines acted illogically and abusively toward us and other employees who refused to abandon our religious convictions or our constitutional rights. We held on to our convictions and rights and now we find ourselves in a legal fight with United Airlines for their behavior toward us. The simple fact is that United broke established Federal Law as we will describe below.
Our group, fondly known as Gideons Army, filed our original lawsuit against United Airlines January 19, 2023. We are standing against the discriminatory action taken by United Airlines and in doing so, demand that this type of over-reaching medical and religious abuse will never happen again. If United Airlines is able to get-away with these actions, every employer in the United States will incorporate these same actions in perpetuity.
We faced religious discrimination, a hostile work environment with employees constructively discharged through harassment and intimidation, and United Airlines operated as a State Actor with the federal government.
On June 21, 2023 we filed a critical amendment to our lawsuit where we clarify specific “black and white” US law violations and illegal actions by United Airlines directly in opposition to our legal medical freedoms. In US Code 21, Section 360bbb-3, every person has a legal requirement to be 1) informed of the option to accept or refuse administration of an Emergency Use Authorized (EUA) medical treatment, 2) of the consequences of refusing the medical treatment, 3) of alternatives to the experimental EUA product available, and 4) of their benefits and risks . United Airlines blatantly violated this US law when it mandated every US based employee to take the EUA drug by September 27, 2021 or be fired.
In addition, the 2005 Federal Register established the precedent with the first ever EUA product. The precedent makes clear the "option to accept or refuse administration of the Anthrax Vaccine, of its consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives that are available, and of their benefits and risks. This precedent established that anyone who refuses to take the medical product are protected from any punitive action or consequences against them. No job loss, no discrimination, no penalty.
The context of the EUA law and Anthrax Vaccine precedent originates from another law, 21 CFR 50.25, Protection of Human Subjects and Elements of Informed Consent. This regulation states (with regard to Emergency Use Authorized (EUA) drugs) "participation is voluntary, that refusal to participate involved no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled, and that the subject may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled." It also states that consequences incurred by "the subject’s decision to withdraw from the research and procedures for orderly termination of participation by the subject" were strictly medical in nature.
21 USC 360bbb-3 law is black and white. The additional precedent in 2005 from the Federal Register for the first ever EUA applied to the Anthrax vaccine is black and white. The context of the consequences from 21 CFR 50.25 establish that potential medical consequences could occur, and go no further (only medical consequences). NO ONE can mandate experimental unapproved EUA medical products. It’s against US law!
The original EUAs for the Pfizer and Moderna experimental drugs were authorized in Dec 2020 and the Johnson & Johnson EUA authorized in Feb 2021.
In August 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) preliminarily approved only one COVID-19 (mRNA) vaccine, COMIRNATY. As it came to pass, the drug COMIRNATY was made, but only exported, and there were some vials presented within the military at high refusal locations - but they appeared to retract it when some lawyers challenged that it was misbranded and mislabeled at Ft Detrick. It ultimately was never marketed in the United States.
There was tremendous confusion sown with the Pfizer “COMIRNATY” announcement. The FDA, approved COMIRNATY (which was never produced) under a biologics license agreement (BLA), then simply reissued the previous Emergency Use Authorization, claiming it was appropriate to protect the public health or safety under section 564(g)(2) of the Act (Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938).
The purposely confusing words were used to confound the public through a bait and switch where millions of Americans believed the Pfizer product was FDA “approved,” when in reality the Pfizer product only had its EUA authorization renewed.
The Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines were NEVER given FDA approval, only Emergency Use Authorization. The FDA acknowledged that the approved COMIRNATY vaccine was "legally distinct" from the EUA Pfizer vaccine, and don’t forget, COMIRNATY never entered the market.
Just a month prior to those FDA EUA actions in July, 2021, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) Acting Assistant Attorney General (lawyer) Dawn Johnsen, issued a DoJ memo deceptively paving the way for the vaccine mandates across the nation. DoJ discussed section 564 of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act in which they refer to 21 USC 360bbb. Here the DoJ spills a lot of ink and massively misinterprets the law's reference to consequences and contradicts the 21 USC 360bbb-3 and 21CFR 50.25 interpretation.. The opinion invents a new term "secondary consequences." This broad term, the DoJ opines, could be applied to include: job loss, social actions, isolation, denial of rights, not being able to attend school, and many others that somehow applied to the EUA law, when EUA law only specified medical consequences. Job loss and school attendance and other secondary consequences have never been applied to protect human subjects in clinical trials or EUA use. The DoJ adds that the "FDA has the authority to impose additional conditions as the agency finds necessary or appropriate to protect public health" and "FDA has authority to adapt to changing circumstances". These statements attempt to justify the newly developed ‘secondary consequences.”
The DoJ went further to twist 21 USC 360bbb conditions for authorization of unapproved products and the required conditions with respect to emergency use. Importantly, the DoJ omits the EUA language that individuals administered must be "informed of their rights". The DoJ also omits the legal language of "consequences" of refusing (inventing secondary consequences instead) based upon its contextual basis in US law, USC 21, Section 360bbb and legal precedent from 21 CFR 50.25.
We believe these omissions and additions were intentionally constructed to confuse, deceive, and manipulate the American people.
Biden’s nation wide vaccine mandate attempt was shot-down by the Supreme Court in January of 2022 but it is clear that United Airlines was carrying the water for the Biden goal as a State Actor. In March of 2022, previously dismissed employees were “allowed” to return to work, but under extreme scrutiny and with the understanding that they could be returned to Leave Without Pay at United’s sole discretion. Some returned, but the discrimination continued.
Finally, on April 18, 2023, the FDA under EUA law issued a new “authorization” regarding the bivalent boosters which de-authorized the original (United mandated) Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson monovalent unapproved medical products. Subsequently, the US government’s illegal vaccine mandates were rescinded with announcements to "move beyond" their original illegal overreach. In other words, "nothing to see here, let’s move on"!
Nowhere in US law is there any authority for ANYONE to mandate EUA medical products without informed consent. Informed means a person must be informed of the known and potential benefits, known and potential risks of use of the products and what are unknown benefits and risks. Consent states each person must have the option to accept or refuse administration of the product. Punishments or consequences for refusing these medical products are strictly prohibited by US law regardless of the opinion of the Whitehouse or DoJ.
All risks for taking the experimental medical products were placed on United Airlines employees as UAL and other entities tried to hide behind a thin veil of “word-salad” to intimate immunity from their own violations. United Airlines and the US Government spread false statements of science and colluded to censor any emerging scientific alternatives and reasonable safety concerns. The US Government and United Airlines ignored US law and legal precedent which states that each person has a legal right to "accept or refuse" an EUA product without penalty or loss of benefits.
This United Airlines case affects our plaintiff team, all United Airlines employees, and every American who works in the United States of America. This case will set a precedent for future companies who try to forcibly mandate employees to take any medical procedure as a condition to either enter into or continue their employment. Our rights were violated; we were unjustly harassed and coerced by United Airlines and they need to be held accountable for their actions.
Please stand with us and support our lawsuit. You can read our amended complaint here. Our success is your success! We are fighting this fight to ensure this violation of US law never happens again. We are standing for the freedom of all Americans. We are American workers, employees of a large corporation, and we need your help.
Your monthly gift helps us afford the fight against this financial Goliath. Please consider supporting our lawsuit at https://www.givesendgo.com/wingsforliberty. Thank you!
Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!