GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 223

Your right to due process is found equally under the forth, fifth and sixth amendments. The forth states the right of people to be secure in their homes, specifically;

“The right of the people to be secure in their PERSONS, houses, paper and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures . . . . SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED . . . . and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and the particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.”

From the ninth amendment:

“The enumeration in this constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

That is to say, your common law rights can not be violated in any way, shape or form without probable cause of committing some crime against the common law, by some measurable loss to some other living human being. What this means is that congress has no authority whatsoever to add onto the constitution in such a way that would take any rights away previously guaranteed to anyone. If they do, according to Marbury vs. Madison, those very add on’s, in whatever form they may be, are to be:

1. Declared null and void
2. Recognized as having no power to enforce
3. Recognized as having no obligation to obey
4. Reported to settle as if they never existed
5. Known as unconstitutional from the date of enactment
6. Recognized as no court being bound to uphold them

The tenth amendment states;

“The powers not delegated to the united states by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.”

This means the constitution is a limited contract, meant to limit government. Nor do the police have the power to take away

224 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

rights previously guaranteed by the constitution. Marshall vs.

Kansas City Mo., 355 S.W. 2nd, 877,883 states;
“Police power is subject to limitations of the federal and state

constitutions, and especially to the requirement of due process.”

Some other great facts to remember are;

Title 5, USC section 556 (d): also 557, and section 706: If you are denied due process of law in any way, all jurisdiction ceases automatically.

From American Jurisprudence, volumes 16: Constitutional Law, section 97:

This volume tells a judge how to interpret the constitution;

“That the constitution should receive a liberal interpretation in favor of the citizen is especially true with respect to those provisions which were designed to safeguard the liberty and security of the citizen in regard to both PERSON and property . . . .” See note 31, Breyers vs. United States 273 US 28 . . . . “and a constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary (you!). Similarly a provision intended to afford a remedy to those who have just claimed should receive a beneficial construction for the purpose of extending the remedy to all who might fairly come within the meaning of the terms.”

Forced vaccinations fall under the category of unreasonable seizure of your body; or the bodies of your children. They are the epitome of seizure of your being. You should always ask for specific performance from any court in favor of you, the beneficiary of the contract, which is the united states constitution. Contract law states that any contract shall be enforced most favorable in favor of the non-preparer(you). You have a right to claim specific performance of the constitution.

Politicians think they also have the right to do whatever they want during a declared emergency; also a falsehood according to Am. Jurisprudence.

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 225

Section 98: Effect of public emergency;

“While an emergency cannot create power, and NO EMERGENCY JUSTIFYS THE VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OR STATE CONSTITUTIONS . . . . ”

“On the other hand, a contention that a grave emergency such as a depression should permit construction of the constitutional provisions which would meet the emergency was rejected in one case, the court holding that neither the legislature nor any executive or judicial officer may disregard the provisions of the constitution in cases of an emergency where the plain and unequivocal terms of the constitution present no question of construction as to departures in emergencies.”

How clear can you get? Even in declared “emergencies,” the spin doctor politicians cannot disregard your constitutional rights. Nowhere in the constitution does it state that your rights can be suspended due to any emergency.

More goodies from Am. Jurisprudence:

Section 117:
The courts are not at liberty to search for meanings beyond

the instrument of the constitution. The courts must apply the terms of the constitution as written.

Section 155:
The courts are not at liberty to overlook or disregard the

constitutional demands. If the constitution prescribes one rule and the statute another, and a different rule, it is the duty of the courts to declare that the constitution and not the statute governs in cases before them for judgment.

Sections 255, 256:
An unconstitutional law is null and wholly void. An

unconstitutional law is null and void from the date of enactment. No repeal of these unconstitutional laws are necessary. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law.

226 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

Sections 257, 258:
On the other hand, it is clear that congress cannot by

authorization or ratification give the slightest effect to a state law or constitution which is in conflict with the constitution of the united states.

Religious Freedom

The section following this chapter provides you with different methods of fighting for your common law rights, giving you the power of choosing whether or not to vaccinate your child. Many people whimper under such stress, saying they’d rather vaccinate their kids than have to fight the system. I have also known people who have gone to local courts on the issue and lost, simply because their case was based on asking the wrong questions. In America, we have religious freedom. Not merely the freedom to practice whatever recognized, organized religion we choose. But to practice freely, a religion of ONE if we choose to, even if no one in the world has ever heard of our religion before. We can be called the Church Of The Rabbit In The Moon, worshipping that fictional character. One of the tenets of this religion is that it forbids vaccines, and if anyone makes you go against that tenet by mandating a vaccine on you or your family, they are violating your rights to freely exercise your religious beliefs granted under the constitution. This is why practically all states have religious exemptions to vaccinations in their laws.

You don’t have to have a silly religion like the example above to avoid vaccines. Simply put, your religion is how you choose to relate with God in worship. Under your right to worship freely, granted to you by the constitution through common law, you can have your body as part of that worship. Your body is Gods’ temple. It could be your belief that this body, which was given to you by God, as a divine temple, cannot be altered with man made ( and thus inferior ) chemicals and mixtures, such as vaccines. It can be the belief in your personal religion that only God made substances will pass through your body and blood stream. It can be your religious belief that only your God given immune system will

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 227

protect you from “germs” and other “contagions”; that it is a mortal sin to place medical chemicals into your body temple to alter God’s perfection. It can be your religious standpoint, that receiving a disease naturally and healing from it naturally, is a necessary part of growing and living in God’s world. You should ask anyone who challenges you on this point, “are you attempting to deny me my constitutional right to religious freedom?” Some schools I have dealt with in the past have declared personal religions that are not the normal, organized ones we usually hear about, as “frivolous,” or “not a valid religion.” Your next good question should be, “be so kind as to explain to me the legal definition of a frivolous or valid religion.” Medical and school officials would have to be quite dim- witted if they answered this question, since ANY ANSWER would wind up becoming a constitutional violation of your rights, regardless of what is written in your State’s vaccination statute.

Another great question to ask anyone attempting to push an oppressive statute on you is, “are you trying to deny me due process of the law by making a legal determination right now?” This statement is my favorite “bureaucrat melter.” Some States have limited the religious exemption to vaccines, writing that the exemption needs to be of a “well recognized denomination, whose teachings include reliance on prayer or spiritual means alone for healing.” The same limits also require a person to be an adherent member of the religious organization. Now before you run out and join the local Christian Science Church to avoid oppressive vaccines, remember you must learn to be a bulldog when it comes to this issue. The simple wording of religious exemptions such as this, which claim an exemption must be of a specific “well recognized religious denomination,” would more than likely be held as unconstitutional by any court, if not totally void primarily for its’ vagueness. The good news is that most State vaccine statutes are not written this way. More and more churches as well, are speaking out against compulsory vaccines, so Keep strong! By asking the right questions, you will prevail.

I have also formed a religion called, “The Church of Christ Consciousness.” I have taken the time to be sure all the documents validating this church are in accordance with the guidelines for

228 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

worship under the constitution of these united states. You can become an adherent member of this church at any time. We ask for a one time donation of $25 (US FRN) if you are able. You will receive a packet of detailed information explaining the religious tenets of the church, which include reliance on prayer or spiritual means alone for healing, as well as detailed instructions on beating vaccination bureaucracy by standing firm in these religious beliefs. Understand this does not mean that you are vowing to never use medicines or other remedies, or attend different religious functions. Part of the prayer practices of this church include receiving inner messages from God, which guide you to the correct therapies to use for yourself and your children in extreme, life threatening situations only. Otherwise, these religious tenets do not permit you to use medications, vaccinations, or other remedies as a means of healing. You will receive a document stating that you are an adherent member of this religious faith, and yes, you can be an adherent member of two religions at the same time. You don’t have to give up any other family religion to be a member of the Church of Christ Consciousness. Further information on becoming involved in this church can be found in the documents section.

It is also important to understand that this issue may very well turn out to be a HUGE issue. Regardless of your creator endowed, natural and unalienable rights, most State courts believe that an individual does not have absolute freedom from State invasion of his body. This terrible fact is rooted, once again, in the religion of the medical profession that preaches the doctrine of the germ theory. They have convinced politicians and lawmakers at large to adhere to this doctrine, otherwise burn in the eternal damnation of epidemic and contagious disease death rate increases, of which they would be deemed fully responsible. State courts have always ruled, up to this point anyway, that the individual, regardless of religious or other belief, has an obligation to society to help prevent the spread of “contagious” disease. Being a citizen of the State and a member of society thus, you must give up your common law right of freedom from body invasion to some extent for the good of the State. What form of government is this beginning to sound like?

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 229

State courts rule time and time again that they have authority over a persons’ individual rights, since the rights of the citizens of a State as a group are more important than a single individuals’ rights. Therefore, in the event of any “State interest,” you and your children can be forcefully medicated with vaccines.

Now it doesn’t stop there, otherwise everything we have written thus far is a waste of time. Again, success in this legal arena all comes down to having a clear mind, keeping calm and asking the right questions. If you can do that, you will avoid going to court all together, without ever having to speak to a lawyer or have your children vaccinated. Once the right questions are asked, you are backing school and health department professionals in a corner they can only get out of if they answer those questions. What the medical cartel fears most, is that these questions could lead to a legal process when brought before a judge, that very possibly could create a legal precedent which could change the way courts now look at compulsory vaccines. This very threat of legal precedent is what keeps you from having to pay a lawyer, go to court and adhere to compulsory vaccine laws.

The courts have ruled that pharmaceutical companies must adequately warn the consumer of the potentially dangerous propensity of their products. Failure to do so renders their product “unreasonably dangerous,” and exposes them to liability for injuries. Warning a doctor alone is not sufficient to relieve the manufacturer from liability, as was so declared by another legal precedent. The courts have ruled that it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to see that the warnings reach the consumer. This shows that a warning of potential danger regarding any vaccine, MUST reach the patient or parent so that vaccine is not deemed “unreasonably dangerous.” This can only be done by either your pediatrician directly warning you before administering the shot, or by pamphlet information given directly to you, explaining its’ warnings and potential risks. Legally, it seems quite inconsistent to require a manufacturer of vaccines to warn the consumer of potential risks, and then compel that same consumer to be injected against their will. This is a very solid legal point.

230 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

If the consumer is not allowed to make a choice after knowing the risks, what good are knowing the risks? This is precisely how the government opens itself up to huge liability year after year from vaccine damage. The laws being written in this way absolve the pharmaceutical companies from liability, since by law they gave you fair warning your child could become brain damaged. The State becomes more liable then since they forced you to have the child vaccinated regardless of the warning, and they pay out millions of dollars each year to prove it. All things being as they are, I suspect the laws have been written this way for good reason. The medical cartel is behind the lobbying efforts which engineered this complicated network of legal and medical fraud.

Insurance companies generally refuse to underwrite participation in any compulsory vaccine program. In the 1960’s pharmaceutical companies paid out huge judgments for injuries related to single polio vaccines and Quadrigen, a four in one vaccine targeted against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio. Many insurance companies refused coverage for damages related to the “swine flu” vaccine program on this basis alone. Between 1979 and 1983 a staggering 9121 lawsuits were filed against the United States for damages related to swine flu and other vaccines, and $1,150,000 was paid out. As of December 1979 for the swine flu vaccine alone, 3813 administrative claims had been filed for a total of $3,417,000,000 in damages. Of these claims, only 118 were paid! This is merely 3% of the total claims filed, which only paid a total of 2.7 million after settlement! This is a mockery of legal justice and an outrage to society in general. Congress then passed a statute under which the United States accepted liability for injury or death arising out of the administration of the swine flu program. This sealed liability to the U.S. government and absolved the pharmaceutical companies, once again. It sure seems that local, State and federal government wish to be the insurer of the public against injuries or deaths related to vaccines, having some interesting affection for the pharmaceutical companies and a need to protect them from ongoing legal hassles. Interesting indeed. Will the real government for and of the people, please stand up?! Hmmmmm. No one seems to be standing up. Okay then, will the

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 231

real government masquerading as the government for and of the people please stand up?!

Unconsented medical treatment further constitutes assault and battery, and exposes medical doctors, hospitals and the State to liability for money damages due to such treatment. An individual can decide to live in pain, to shorten her life, or even die rather than submit to medical treatment against her wishes. The courts have ruled that: “no right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from restraint of interference of others unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law” ( Union Pacific Railway Co. vs. Botsford ).

An individual according to the State however, does not have absolute freedom from invasion of his body. Further, if an individual does not wish protection under the law from the State, he may be excused from the law if the rest of society is not hurt by his actions. This is an important point. The State, parroting doctrine from the medical cartel, will insist control over you and your child’s bodies to insure neither of you become the next Typhoid Mary. But if vaccines truly work, and the bulk of society has received them, what does the State have to worry about? This is a very useful question you should always remember to ask. There could be hundreds of unvaccinated Typhoid Mary’s running around, possibly being carriers for other diseases as well. So what! The other members of society have been vaccinated. Vaccines work. Not a problem. Well, this is a huge problem for the State, because State vaccination programs have never been about protecting the masses from disease. They are primarily about receiving huge money payoffs, masquerading as “federal aid” to promote vaccine programs. The more vaccines a State enforces, the more money it receives. If one person gets out of the pen and starts spreading the news that they are unvaccinated and doing just fine, word will catch on. Then more and more people would choose not to be vaccinated or subject their children to it. Then the State would argue that we would have larger and larger portions of the population becoming ill with contagious disease, but this is another lie. There have never been any studies comparing the overall health

232 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

and well being of unvaccinated people to vaccinated, and the medical cartel never wants an honest study completed in this arena. To do so would thwart their vaccination profits and control of the people, and further open lawmakers to responsibility for ethically questionable laws which have supported compulsory vaccine programs for decades. The plain and simple truth is that unvaccinated people, especially children, are far healthier than the vaccinated population at large.

We as a nation of sovereign people, need to push for a complete moratorium on compulsory vaccines. If this is done, we can effectively study the difference in vaccinated and unvaccinated groups over a long range study. I will guarantee you, and place everything I own on the outcome, that the unvaccinated group will be deemed far healthier.

Most states also provide medical exemptions to vaccination. This is another avenue of relief from the vaccination Gestapo, in that medical exemptions will no doubt always be written into State law to cover the States’ liability in court. States realize there are many vaccination related lawsuits begun each year, and people wind up suing the State who they say, forced them to vaccinate their now brain damaged, or dead child. Part of the States’ legal defense is always their medical exemption to vaccination, and they will propose that it was your responsibility as the parent to be sure your child was medically fit to receive the vaccine.

Here’s how you can make the medical exemption work for you. Send certified letters titled, Requests For Assurance Of Medical Treatment and Relief Upon Damage, ( found in the forms section ) to your State and town’s department of health officials, as well as to any school officials who are blocking your child’s entrance due to no vaccines. The letter states that you are willing to comply with the vaccination laws as long as you can be guaranteed the State, town and school will cover any and all possible damages that may occur to your child via the vaccine. The letter also requests a guarantee that the vaccine will prevent the particular disease or diseases for which it is being given. The letter does not ask for a guarantee of immunity, because legally and medically all immunity means is that a person shows antibodies in her blood for a particular disease. Immunity is by no means a guarantee of wellbeing, or prevention from any disease. In many cases

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 233

this letter alone will create enough turmoil to allow your child to return to school without vaccines. To my knowledge, no one in the history of mankind has ever signed such a letter, and the chances for ending any vaccination dilemma with your school are high.

I have also known of people who try and reason with the pediatrician, asking him to please read the packet insert to them so they can understand what they’re getting into. This can lead to the MD granting you the medical exemption, but more likely he will attempt to intimidate you. Pediatricians tell you that there is a greater chance of being struck by lightening than in developing those kinds of side effects, printed clearly in the packet insert from the vaccine. Also, all parents should note that the packet inserts do not mention that the vaccine will prevent the disease it is given for. It only states that it will increase antibody counts, which you now know are totally worthless.

In some cases, especially with concern to private schools, the Release From Liability Of Disease letter in the forms section works quite well. Notarize this letter and hand it to all school officials and doctors afraid of loosing their jobs for not following the law. It places all the emphasis back on you legally for liability in case your child becomes ill, and fully releases the doctor or school from such liability.

Another letter provided in the next section is titled, Request For Medical Exemption Under State Statute, and it states that there is enough evidence in valid research on vaccinations to suggest your child is eligible for a medical exemption under the law. They always come back at you and say you need a medical doctor to claim a vaccine medical exemption for your child, and if you have a good relationship with an MD somewhere, this can surely make the process move a lot smoother. If you can’t get an MD to sign for a medical exemption, then you are still standing on a strong legal ground at the common law. If they refuse to sign your certified Request For Assurance Of Medical Treatment and Relief Upon Damage letter ( they would be crazy if they did sign it ), as well as refuse you a medical exemption, and yet still block access for your child into school, you are building a case to sue the State, town and school for their actions. Find a lawyer who will support you in this

234 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

kind of suit. If and when you still have to go to court, your lawyer should be experienced in issues concerning first amendment rights for free exercise of religion. The court always argues that the health of the State population in general will be at risk if certain individuals are allowed to not vaccinate their children. Your lawyer must be able to prove fully before the court that your decision to not vaccinate can in no way harm society as a whole, especially if vaccinations are truly believed to work and the bulk of school children are vaccinated. Considering this scenario, I would love to see a court rule that vaccination programs cannot be guaranteed effective. That would open up some very interesting doors for debate.

In any State court case regarding compulsory vaccines, the State’s interest ( on the books anyway ) is the protection of its’ citizens from the spread of communicable diseases. It can certainly be argued in the conventional sense, that routine compulsory vaccinations should not be permitted to interfere with your religious rights, since there are at present, no epidemics running amok, and you are not likely to begin one. The party line is indeed, that vaccines have conquered most contagious disease! Whopsie do for that! Since everyone is already safe, why should you have to rescind your religious beliefs of avoiding invasive medical chemicals being injected into your family’s blood streams? The immediacy of the health factor for contagious disease is no longer so great an issue. Any dispute the State now puts forth only weakens its’ argument supporting compulsory vaccines! After all, if compulsory vaccines have been so great, why worry about you and your family? The State cannot adequately prove that school children who do not receive vaccines create an immediate or even threatened danger to the other, vaccinated school children, or the public at large, because to do so invalidates the effectiveness of vaccine programs. A good lawyer can then place the burden on the State to prove a present or threatening danger to the public which can occur as a result of your decision to not vaccinate. If the State does present “expert” witness to defend its’ case to vaccinate, then your lawyer could present the true side of the scientific and medical vaccine controversy, well sighted in this book and known to the public eye

GOOD-BYE GERM THEORY 235

in 2000. Many “experts” cringe at such truth, and have difficulty maintaining their poise against the enormous challenge of questioned fact regarding compulsory vaccines. If enough cases are presented to the courts in this manner, I feel the States will have to begin ruling more and more in favor of exemption. This of course, means more and more people have to legally challenge compulsory vaccines. Without the action of the people, nothing will get done.

Here is another way the Request For Assurance Of Medical Treatment and Relief Upon Damage letter can be used at your pediatricians’ office. Go the doctors’ office with several witnesses, and ask your pediatrician to sign it, just in case your child becomes ill or gets hurt in any way from the shots. No doctor in their right mind will ever sign it, so you simply walk out with your child and witnesses, and say good-bye. Now you are asking better questions. You have shifted the issue to a more complex one of attempting to gain assurance for a medical operation, and the possibility of medical mal-practice if the doctor refuses to give you that assurance. You then send a letter to the State and town departments of health, and the school officials, stating that you attempted to get your child vaccinated as they requested, but the doctor would not vaccinate your child. Have your witnesses write up and notarize affidavits confirming this fact. Send the affidavits along as well (bureaucrats just love affidavits! ). They may then tell you to forget about your silly letter of relief and get your child vaccinated anyway. Remember to ask the right questions always with regards to dealing with these bureaucrats. You should then mention that you couldn’t help but notice that there is a medical exemption to vaccination written within the law. They will acknowledge there indeed is one. Then ask them how one would know if their child falls under this category. They will say your pediatrician has to determine that due to your child’s particular sensitivity, or problem which precludes the child from receiving a vaccine. Here’s where you have them! If the pediatrician already refused to sign the Request For Assurance Of Medical Treatment and Relief Upon Damage form, she is confirming her uncertainty, professionally and medically, that your child will not be effected adversely by the vaccine. If the

236 DR. WILLIAM P. TREBING

pediatrician who administers the shot, is not certain enough to sign a form stating your child will not be harmed after the shot, that is your admission from the pediatrician of a medical exemption! The State can well argue here, that you were attempting to coerce the pediatrician into signing something he could not possibly provide a guarantee for, since the packet inserts of all vaccines do claim certain risks. Whenever a person goes in for an operation, or takes a medicine of any kind, there are also certain risks. But a person chooses to take medication and have operations. He may not, as is the case here, choose to have a vaccination.

Making life a lot easier however, is the fact that most states stand by their religious exemption clauses without providing any extra trouble for the parents. There are several religions you may become part of which include anti-vaccination beliefs as religious doctrine. As noted, one such religion is included in the forms section. The problem is usually not with the State, but with some ultra brain washed school nurse or official, who feels they have to save your child from your ill decision making. Again, the best advice is to be a bulldog. Stand firm in what you believe, and know you have God given, creator endowed unalienable rights. When you learn how to exercise your common law rights, this process will become easier and easier.

Another very interesting method of avoiding compulsory vaccines deals with your legal right to privacy. This has yet to be used successfully, but the argument has tremendous potential for the future. In court, it can be stated that this right comes from the Bill of Rights, the 9th and 14th amendments. The right to personal privacy is based on the theory that the individual has the right to control his own body, and to make fundamental decisions about his own life. This right extends to children as well. As well as religious exemption, this right is limited by the particular State’s compelling interest. The State could be made to show sufficient interest in order to override a person’s right to privacy with regards to his decision to not vaccinate. In the past, this right has been used successfully with respect to abortion, euthanasia, drugs to mental patients and making certain kinds of important decisions with respect to one’s body. Vaccines are proven to be harmful to the body, and by