Court in France ruled death from COVID - vaccine suicide

[Andrew W]

Court in France ruled death from COVID - vaccine suicide

AW - And why? Because according to the French court the covid vaccine is
experimental. So I guess the a.a twits here are just going to call the
French court conspiracy theorists.


https://www.world-today-news.com/court-in-france-ruled-death-from-covid-vaccine-suicide/


The judge took the side of the insurance company, which refused to pay
insurance to the children of a millionaire who died after being vaccinated.
In France, the case of a wealthy elderly Parisian businessman who insured
his life for many millions and died from COVID-vaccination caused a great
resonance. The insurance company refused to pay money to the relatives of
the deceased, and the court recognized the correctness of the company,
reports Our Central Europe.

Doctors admitted that the man’s death was the result of vaccination. After
that, the insurance company refused to pay the family money, because the
insurance policy excludes the use of experimental drugs and treatments,
including vaccination against coronavirus.

The family sued the insurance company, but lost. The judge ruled that the
side effects of the experimental vaccine were made public and the deceased
could not claim to be unaware of them when he voluntarily took the vaccine.
The court also stressed that in France there is no law that forced him to be
vaccinated.

“Therefore, his death, in fact, is a suicide,” the court ruled.

The insurance company noted that suicide, like death from an experimental
drug, is not an insured event.

Earlier it was reported that in New Zealand 26-year-old man died shortly
after vaccination from coronavirus drug company Pfizer. The authorities
blamed the COVID drug for the death of a person.

Also in Croatia, a 33-year-old man died due to thrombosis after vaccination
with the AstraZeneca vaccine.

[El Kabong]

"Andrew W" <sp...@defense.com> wrote:

> Court in France ruled death from COVID - vaccine suicide
>
> AW - And why? Because according to the French court the covid vaccine is
> experimental. So I guess the a.a twits here are just going to call the
> French court conspiracy theorists.
>
>
> https://www.world-today-news.com/court-in-france-ruled-death-from-covid-vaccine-suicide/

Don't you think it strange that there are no names,
either of the alleged victim, the insurance company, or
the judge?

Is the Pfizer CEO still in jail?

[Andrew W]

"El Kabong" wrote in message
news:5ce8vg15ja0160e3f...@4ax.com...

>"Andrew W" <sp...@defense.com> wrote:
>
>> Court in France ruled death from COVID vaccine suicide

>>
>> AW - And why? Because according to the French court the covid vaccine is
>> experimental. So I guess the a.a twits here are just going to call the
>> French court conspiracy theorists.
>>
>>
>> https://www.world-today-news.com/court-in-france-ruled-death-from-covid-vaccine-suicide/
>
>Don't you think it strange that there are no names,
>either of the alleged victim, the insurance company, or
>the judge?
>

You want names so you can dig up dirt? Why don't you do that when the MSM,
bureaucratic medicos and governments make the claims they constantly flog?
Their lies are being exposed now.

[sri atman devi]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:30:09 PM UTC-7, Andrew W wrote:
> "El Kabong" wrote in message
> news:5ce8vg15ja0160e3f...@4ax.com...
>
> >"Andrew W" <sp...@defense.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Court in France ruled death from COVID vaccine suicide
> >>
> >> AW - And why? Because according to the French court the covid vaccine is
> >> experimental. So I guess the a.a twits here are just going to call the
> >> French court conspiracy theorists.
> >>
> >>
> >> https://www.world-today-news.com/court-in-france-ruled-death-from-covid-vaccine-suicide/
> >

//

>>Don't you think it strange that there are no names,
> >either of the alleged victim, the insurance company, or
> >the judge?

> You want names so you can dig up dirt?

Number six on the list of Andrew's Stock Evasions:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) You can't prove anything on the internet.
2) It won't do any good unless you research it yourself.
3) I could answer that, but you'd just jeer.
4) Millions of [pick one or more] researchers/doctors/witnesses/people around the world...
5) You won't understand until you're ready.
6) You want names again so you can try to dig up some dirt and slander
7) My answer would be meaningless to you.
8) Evidence is for law courts
9) There's no point in me telling you
10) Govt/Corps are corrupt. You have to judge them from their motives.
11) Deep State/MSM are blocking the real information.
12) You are a shill for Big Pharma/Deep State/Govt.
13) Whistleblowers would be killed if they went public.
14) Only after you prove that you know the meaning of the word evidence
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In point of actual fact, providing names would allow people
to confirm for themselves that the event you claim actually happened.

I tried, in the absence of any specifics, to find any other articles
about this supposed case. I could find none. If it actually did happen
as described, specific names would make it easy to prove it did happen.

> Why don't you do that when the MSM,
> bureaucratic medicos and governments make the claims they constantly flog?

Seriously? Every article I see on announcements from the WHO, CDC,
HHS, and Biden administration quite clearly names the spokesperson
who is making the announcement. When the information they are
giving is based on studies, they generally reference those studies.


Sri

[El Kabong]

Because it's so believable to see an anonymous story
about a nameless judge who ruled that a nameless
insurance company doesn't have to pay a nameless policy
holder any money. Because that just reeks of responsible
journalism, doesn't it.

But we all know Big Insurance is corrupt, and they can
buy any judge cheaper than they can pay out. You have to
examine their motives for not wanting to pay up. That
proves the judge and Big Insurance are evil.