I am writing this letter on behalf of many service members across the country. In a disturbing pattern across numerous United States Military Bases, Military Academies, and other Department of Defense (DOD) Installations - military and civilian personnel are being coerced into taking the COVID-19 vaccines, which have only been approved for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). A range of misleading statements, deceptive marketing practices, manipulative and coercive measures are being applied to service members who do not take the COVID-19 vaccines. Even though Senior DoD leaders have repeatedly said, on record, that Service members will not be adversely affected should they decline, we are seeing the opposite of that at the tactical level on a daily basis. Some of these measures include restrictions on an otherwise healthy population such as restrictions on travel outside a state, limitations on leave approvals, and other forms of civil liberty violations. Examples: Leaders will not approve travel for personnel who – by law – are legally allowed to decline the vaccine - yet leaders are instead only approving for those who receive it. Special “counseling” sessions are required with the chain of command asking for specific reasons why they have lawfully declined. In one instance, one leader was even asked for his subordinate service members to write 5 different reasons for declining the ‘vaccine’ and demanded that the response be put into MLA format. Segregation of cadets at West Point where 37 non covid vaxxed students were placed in a 20 person tent. Forcing non-vaxxed service members to wear masks during swim exercises. Mask mandates for the non-vaxxed is a violation of privacy policies. It is unscientific and counterproductive to physical training. Lifted restrictions for vaccinated persons. This creates a hostile environment and blatantly disrupts good order and discipline. Withholding school/ deployment/ training if they don’t receive the vaccine. Gathering lists and publicly listing service members who are denying the vaccine to higher echelons of Command. Non-vaxxed servicemembers forced to ROM/quarantine on ships for 3 weeks pre and post-deployment while vaxxed SMs are allowed to freely move about. Restricting movement of non-vaxxed individuals to 50 miles from base. Preventing families of graduates to attend graduation ceremonies unless they (the family members) are vaccinated. These policies undermine the right of refusal for an EUA drug, restrict the freedom of movement of healthy people, and thus creates a culture of coercion in clear violation of medical ethics. For an unapproved product, the statute (section 564(e)(1)(A)(iii)) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, requires that individuals are informed; “…that they have the option to accept or refuse the EUA product and of any consequences of refusing administration of the product; and of any available alternatives to the product and of the risks and benefits of available alternatives.” Aside from the fact that there are legitimate personal religious, philosophical and medical concerns about the safety, efficacy and adverse events – there has emerged a more insidious and emerging dilemma; are we now setting a precedent to mandate the suppression of symptoms’ and are we now setting a binding precedent to restrict liberties based on flawed data interpretation? Is the Department of Defense, and our defense medical establishment taking a precarious step toward forcing (incentivizing or coercing) someone to take medications or therapeutics for a symptom(s) of an illness or condition that they do not have? Is the DOD setting a precedent with the trend for symptom reduction via a therapeutic, biologic, gene therapy technology and/or medications with known and unknown risks, to ensure symptom suppression? If the above questions seem unusual it is even more important to note that the clinical trial endpoints of the covid vaccines did NOT look at the prevention of infection, transmission, hospitalization, nor death, they only measured symptom reduction. How much longer will DOD Leadership allow for the flawed data interpretation to drive coerced and incentivized rewards? How far can this precedent extend? Any reasonable person should ask these questions. According to a Lancet Study "Uncoordinated phase 3 trials do not satisfy public health requirements; platform trials designed to address public health relevant questions with a common protocol will allow decisions to be made, informed by common criteria and uniform assessment. These considerations on efficacy and effectiveness are based on studies measuring prevention of mild to moderate COVID-19 infection; they were not designed to conclude on prevention of hospitalization, severe disease, or death, or on prevention of infection and transmission potential. Assessing the suitability of vaccines must consider all indicators, and involve safety, deployability, availability, and costs." In closing, the Department of Defense has relied on faulty and misleading data, failed to perform independent analytic assessments of the clinical trial data, and is now resorting to forms of manipulation, coercion and ‘incentives’ to compel compliance on the uptake of an untested gene therapy technology that is still in clinical trial status. Significant adverse events have already been documented – up to and including death. These actions are without legal precedent. In order to have a healthy debate, in the public square, with members and families of the Department of Defense, Veterans, caregivers, and with our health care representatives, issues like the term effectiveness, coercion and ‘liberties’ gained post vaccination, mandates and medical ethics must be thoroughly communicated, debated and understood. The Department of Defense leadership must address the concerns raised in this letter.

I am writing this letter on behalf of many service members across the country, but more specifically, for those that are under the command of CSM Gibbons at the 3-161 Infantry Dark Rifles, currently being stationed in Poland APO and Grafenwöhr Germany. We were sent this text message which reads: “From CSM Gibbons Gentlemen, I've heard some grumbling that we are purposefully discriminating against Soldiers who opted out of the COVID vaccination. You're absolutely correct. You are being discriminated against. First, lAW the current HPCON guidance, and second, by Germany's policies which we have to abide by lAW the SOFA with the host nation. Same as we will need to here in Poland. I get it. The boss and I, according to DoD policy, couldn't incentivize getting vaccinated nor could we disincentivize choosing not to get vaccinated. We could only provide you with the resources and a choice. That choice was yours and yours alone. You've all made a choice, and regardless of how we think ~bout being "discriminated" against because you opted not to get the vaccine ... You knew this was coming, you made a personal choice, and now you are simply dealing with the results of that choice. Welcome to life 101 ... it isn't fair all the time ... and for many I have little sympathy, because I'll watch you suck down a 6 pack of monsters, and chew half a can or smoke half a pack, and then complain that the government is going to kill you with a shot ... #Facts --- Please disseminate the above message to your folks down to the lowest level." from Battalion SGM” Upon receipt of Gibbons' text and asking more questions about the conditions of their living conditions, we learned that CSM Gibbons & LTC Broyles are holding these “non vaxxed” US soldiers hostage in tents in a gravel yard in Germany & Poland for their lawful and legal “choice.” Gibbons has taken great lengths to add unusual punishments for the non vaxxed to include no laundry, no mail, no internet, no PX for toiletries; while the vaccinated are living in a barracks building, with internet, plumbing, freedom to order food & leave post. It is evident that this action blatantly discriminates against a group of members who freely and legally choose not to take the experimental vaccine. I find these actions unacceptable behavior for a senior enlisted and any officer/commander that endorses this action. Germany nor Poland require any vaccination for their people, and as such, Gibbons lied to his subordinates in order to pass the buck to the German government, which again, does NOT require or have any covid-19 vaccine mandates currently in place. Why are our military members not treated with the same respect and with the same rights as their comrades who have chosen to take the non-approved vaccines? The growing body of research and evidence that is documenting the detrimental effects of these EUA vaccines are very real and cause for serious concern. Senior Leaders making statements not based in fact, are encouraged to look at the reporting and the VAERS data for the most current data on the adverse events. If you are not familiar with the steps needed to query the VAERS database the following: 1) Accept Disclaimer 2) Click on “VAERS Data Search” 3) Group results by “Event Category” 4) Select “COVID 19 VACCINE” and press “Open” 5) Choose “All Locations” 6) Press “Send” As of June 14, 2021, the data indicates that there were 5,888 deaths, 19,597 hospitalizations, 43,891 ER visits, 58,800 office related visits, 1,459 anaphylaxis, and 1,737 cases of Bell’s Palsy following inoculation. There have been over 329K adverse events in VAERS to include pulmonary embolism, pulmonary infarction, and myocarditis, pericarditis, or heart attacks. There is (to date) and based on VAERS reporting alone a 4.10% rate of reactions to COVID-19 vaccinations, including deaths. It is important to add that VAERS has traditionally represented approximately 1% of all adverse reactions. Does CSM Gibbons know, or has he read that the ‘vaccine’ was not tested for its ability to prevent transmission or prevent infection? Does he know how the ‘95%’ efficacy metric was generated? If he was doing his job he would have a firm grasp on this data. He doesn’t and soldiers are paying the price for this. With this information available to every citizen, informed consent, and risk/benefit decisions should be respected. Senior DoD leaders have repeatedly said on record that Service members will not be adversely affected should they refuse this EUA vaccine, and we are seeing the opposite of that at the tactical level on a daily basis. This is no longer a matter of protecting safety of the unit, it has become a matter of discrimination. Discrimination of any kind, is not tolerated in our military. Gibbons has now created an uncomfortable and distressing environment. It is not a good thing to come into work or wear the uniform in defense of our nation and being entrusted to defend our constitution - whilst being treated unfairly and unjustly (in uniform) as a result of making a personal health decision.

I am writing this letter on behalf of many service members across the country, but more specifically, for cadets currently studying at the U.S. Army’s West Point Military Academy. Parents of Army cadets at the United States Military Academy reported that leadership has segregated 37 unvaccinated cadets to live in a 20 person tent for Cadet Field Training (CFT) for June and July. CFT is a student-led summer training requirement of small unit tactical operations. Vaccinated cadets will live in open bay barracks by platoons with a small, separate section for female cadets. These bays have electricity for fans during the hot summer months in New York, and male and female latrines and showers. Unvaccinated cadets now live in a mixed rank, co-ed tent, likely supported by port-o-patties. Currently, nights at Camp Buckner, New York are very cold at 30 degrees. It is evident that this action blatantly discriminates against a group of members who freely choose not to take the experimental vaccine that – by law – is a voluntary medical decision, in part, due to the emergency use authorization status of the product. These actions are unacceptable. Overall, only 139 of 4,000 cadets in the corps have not been vaccinated and, according to the CDC’s own numbers, herd immunity has been achieved at 97%, far exceeding the recommended >60% naturally acquired immunity in populations to protect the elderly and infants. Why are our cadets not treated with the same respect and with the same rights as their comrades who have chosen to take the non-approved vaccines? Parents of cadets in the segregation tent expressed how upsetting it was for USMA leadership to allow these intrusions into what would otherwise be a personal medical decision, without egregious sanctions. The USMA has seemingly sanctioned the “separate and single out” form of coercion to promote a climate of intimidation and humiliation rather than affirming that the experimental drug is voluntary. It is clear that the USMA only wants one choice - accept it under undue pressure or else! This goes against the honor of cadets. Parents are concerned with the agenda of USMA’s medical officer, COL Dawson, who allegedly told the unvaccinated cadets that she “…can’t wait to jam it into their arms.” These cadets are adults, entrusted to make some of the most important and significant decisions on behalf of our military, upon graduation. Their ability to affirm their rights and stand up for their decisions are to be commended. Instead, their medical decisions are now being held hostage to the ideology of USMA’s medical officer. Does COL Dawson know, or has she read that the vaccine was not tested for its ability to prevent transmission or prevent infection? Does she know how the ‘95%’ efficacy metric was generated? If she was doing her job she would have a firm grasp on this data. We suspect she has outsourced her information without any critical thinking or analysis on her part. This is a disgrace. This is no longer a matter of protecting the safety of the unit, it has become a matter of discrimination. Discrimination of any kind, is not tolerated in our military. Further, the growing body of research and evidence that documents the adverse effects of these EUA vaccines are very real and cause for serious concern. Senior Leaders making statements not based in fact, nor conducting an accurate risk assessment of the reported injuries are encouraged to look at the actual clinical trial data, the reporting in the government mandated VAERS system for the most current data on the adverse events. If you are not familiar with the steps needed to query the VAERS database the following: 1) Accept Disclaimer 2) Click on “VAERS Data Search” 3) Group results by “Event Category” 4) Select “COVID 19 VACCINE” and press “Open” 5) Choose “All Locations” 6) Press “Send” As of June 14, 2021, the data indicates that there were 5,888 deaths, 19,597 hospitalizations, 43,891 ER visits, 58,800 office related visits, 1,459 anaphylaxis, and 1,737 cases of Bell’s Palsy following inoculation. There have been over 329K adverse events in VAERS to include pulmonary embolism, pulmonary infarction, and myocarditis, pericarditis, or heart attacks. It is important to add that VAERS has traditionally represented approximately 1% of all adverse reactions. And, to underscore the data entries validity, hospitals are mandated by law to use this system. With this information available to every citizen, informed consent, and risk/benefit decisions should be respected. Senior DoD leaders have repeatedly said, on record, that Service members will not be adversely affected should they refuse this EUA vaccine – yet - we are seeing the opposite of that across the ranks on a daily basis. This is no longer a matter of protecting safety of the unit, it has become a matter of discrimination and coercion. Discrimination and coercion of any kind, is not tolerated in our military. The administration at West Point, Col Dawson, and other bases around the country, have now sent a message loud and clear – and that message is that our laws and rights hold no meaning especially for those that would volunteer to defend our rights. Imagine wanting to proudly wear the uniform, whilst being treated unfairly and unjustly as a result of making a personal health decision. We are disgusted at the treatment our cadets and our service members are currently facing. We demand that you too defend those who have bravely stood in defense of their rights by exercising their rights to not volunteer for this EUA drug.