Posted on 02/03/2022 6:16:52 PM PST by delta7
“My Facebook group has a whistleblower’s sister who said this whole thing is going to finally blow up”……..
so you’re saying we need new conspiracy theories because our old ones came true?
Of course it doesn't!!! Get you policies out and read the suicide clause which will tell you once the policy has been inforce for two years (24 months) it is incontestable for ANY REASON, INCLUDING SUICIDE!!!
Incontestable means the claim will be paid as long as all premiums are paid in full for two full years and NO LEGAL CHALLENGE CAN BE MADE BY THE INSURER!
I am surprised and disappointed that any FReeper would post or promote such an absurd notion on this site. I'm sure most FReepers have a lot more sense than to succumb to such a temptation for sensationalism and nothing else!!!
Ping!!!
Who is your carrier? Seems your post verifies, at least in part the thread
Fake news
Yes, it is a fake story. We can know it’s 100% fake because the lawyer
mentioned in this story, who is a prominent vaccine choice advocate in France, has said that he and his firm are not involved in any such case, he doesn’t know about it, and it’s not real. That and there was no such case before the courts.
There are other clues to it being fake. In France, life insurers have to pay out even if the vaccine is experimental (same in Belgium, this story has many forms so sometimes it’s in France, sometimes Belgium). There are no vaccine exclusions in life insurance contracts in France.
The supposed court judgement, which does not read like an actual court judgement, also equates taking a (experimental) vaccine to suicide and since suicide isn’t covered the claim is denied. Except suicide is covered after one year. If it had been a recent contract, the supposed judgement would have said it was a timing issue. It couldn’t have been a recent contract, though, because most of the stories say he was an old man long retired who would not have been issued a multimillion euro insurance contract within a year of his death.
CNN? NYT?
The decision that the vaccines were safe was a political one, not one based on evidence or on medicine. Insurance is based on reality. Insurance companies work very hard to understand the real risk and, because profit is involved, politics is not a factor.
Boy - that is sure prophetic.
I’m a consultant. I have had to turn down work for working on state and county projects. I’ll need to look into Federal projects when the time comes.
But - yeah, so far I have been able to turn down those jobs and still feed my family.
The other option is to move to another state. (Which my wife wants to do.)
But I read it on the interweb.
It’s almost certainly fake news — or at least has nothing to do with experimental COVID vaccines.
————
Often today, what is now branded fake news often becomes reality. As the vax injuries sky rocket, insurance companies will soon ( are) rewriting their policy disclaimers. It is all about money.
An insurance company can rewrite and update its policy disclaimers, but that would only affect new policies. They can’t turn around and deny a claim based on a disclaimer that was established after the policy was in force and the premium paid.
I found your post at two removes from a link on another thread.
I realize it's six weeks later; and the whole world is taken up with the Ukraine and everything... but would you happen to have a link showing what you just said?
Your later arguments are powerful but lack the "punch in the gut" factor of this first one; it'd be nice to have something concrete to point to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.