US Supreme Court declines to block Indiana University’s vaccine mandate, preserving key precedent for compulsory Covid-19 jabs
RT | August 13, 2021
The US Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from students who sought to strike down Indiana University’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate, leaving in place a potentially key legal precedent for forced inoculations.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett rejected the emergency request to hear the case on Thursday, meaning the high court won’t overturn rulings by an Indiana district court and the US Court of Appeals in Chicago, which upheld the mandate. There were no dissenting opinions cited from other Supreme Court justices.
The Indiana case marked the first legal challenge of a Covid-19 vaccine mandate to come before the Supreme Court. The decision may embolden other colleges and institutions that have considered requiring Covid-19 shots and comes at a time when a growing number of US businesses and schools are ordering such mandates.
Indiana University announced its vaccine order in May, affecting all students and faculty on campus. Eight students sued to block the mandate, saying it violated their right of bodily integrity and forced them to receive unwanted medical treatment. District and appellate court judges found that the university acted lawfully and in the legitimate interest of public health.
The students had argued that the mandate infringed their constitutional right to due process and alleged that risks associated with Covid-19 vaccines outweigh the benefits for healthy people in their age group. “Protection of others does not relieve our society from the central canon of medical ethics requiring voluntary and informed consent,” the lawsuit said.
The appellate court rejected the plaintiffs’ initial appeal, noting that they had other options, such as taking courses online, going to another school or applying for a medical or religious exemption. The court cited a 1905 case in which a Massachusetts mandate for a smallpox vaccine was upheld, at least partly on the basis that the government had a rational reason for ordering inoculations amid a health crisis.
Hundreds of US colleges and universities have imposed vaccine mandates, while some have waited to determine the legality of such orders. Still others have said their mandates are contingent on full FDA approval of one or more Covid-19 vaccines, inasmuch as the three jabs currently available in the US have received only emergency use authorization.
Thursday’s decision comes as a disappointment to conservatives who oppose vaccine mandates. Adding to the aggravation for some observers was the fact that the rejection was handed down by Barrett, the allegedly conservative justice who was appointed by then-President Donald Trump last fall.
“Her true colors have been exposed again,” one Twitter commenter said. “She’s not about protecting people in USA.”
Punishing Scapegoats
By Doug E. Steil | Aletho News | August 12, 2021
Two days ago Merkel and the Bavarian minister announced stringent new measures directed against those who refuse to get their clot shot. For the past few weeks specific media have been inciting hatred against this group, based on lies, more specifically implicit premises that are untrue, as well as illogical or unwarranted conclusions:
• People who got the clot shot are immune to being infected.
• Hence, they are also incapable of infecting others.
• Asymptomatic viral transfer (with high viral load but no sickness) is very common.
• Nearly everyone with no clot shot is at equal risk to get acute viral symptoms.
• At least a 85% “vaccination rate” is required for herd immunity to end the pandemic.
• Those refusing the clot shot are guilty of prolonging the pandemic, harming society.
• These skeptics not going along are parasites who should be shunned from public life.
The recent graph from the central reporting authority in Berlin, the Robert Koch Institute, depicts a 26 week period that highlights the situation very well. The histogram data show gene sequencing information from sampling valid PCR test results, so all the false positives they got are not included here. The government pays labs 200 EUR to sequence a sample.
The gray shades represent the percentage per week that constitutes the derivatives of the virus that emerged in Wuhan, upon which the trial data associated with the clot shot temporary emergency use authorization are based. The blue shades refer to the British variant, and the red to the Indian variant, which have been renamed to get Greek letters. The South African and Brazilian variants barely play a role here.
From an epidemiological perspective it is clear that in Germany the original and British variants have essentially already been eradicated, what one would call “herd immunity” has been attained. Based on information from other countries farther along in the mass experiment, as well as recent admission by the CDC, the clot shot has no effect on the Indian (delta) variant.
Under these circumstances a plausible perception management approach could thus have been:
• Proclaim the experiment was a success because two key variants were wiped out.
• Acknowledge the clot shot is not effective against stemming the Indian variant.
• Discontinue any further inoculations, due to their potential adverse harm.
• Assert that the remaining variant has mild effects and can easily be dealt with.
• Declare an end to the so-called pandemic and the associated restrictive measures.
• Treat all people the same way, yet monitor possible viral spread with thermometers.
However, this was not done because the issue is not about public health but about instituting a totalitarian system that wants to deal harshly with those who are skeptical or critical about the false premises used to bring it on and staunchly refuse to go along with the clot shot experiment. Therefore, the consequences for those not already contaminated twice by the clot shot were instead, as follows:
• The threshold level to get an antigen test for basic activities (haircut, restaurant) was lowered from 50 to 35 (incidences per 100K population per week, based on flawed PCR test).
• People needing to get tested must pay for such tests out of their own pocket beginning October 11.
• In the future, they will likely be excluded altogether from participating in public life. It was suggested they should be shunned by private businesses (restaurants, hotels, cultural venues) as unwelcome customers.
The chosen policy is short-sighted. As the virtuous (obedient) people continue to spread the virus among each other, the skeptics will be blamed for the spread, while those newly infected who thought they were immune will be told that the clot shot is not quite 100% effective, so they will soon need to get a booster shot. Thus, another cycle of madness will be perpetuated, as the totalitarian grip tightens. Authorities want to get rid of the experimental control group consisting of those who did not consent.
Swiss Police Threaten to Stop Enforcing COVID-19 Rules
By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | August 10, 2021
Police in Switzerland have threatened to stop enforcing COVID-19 rules over fears that the measures are disproportionately undermining the fundamental rights of citizens.
A group representing police officers in the Alpine country wrote a letter to the Swiss Federation of Police Officers (FSFP) warning of potential insubordination within the force over the enforcement of draconian laws.
“If the measures were to conflict with the general opinion of the population, disproportionately limiting their fundamental rights, many police officers would no longer be willing to apply them,” the group wrote in the letter.
While the letter was received favorably by lockdown skeptics, the FSFP attempted to dismiss it by claiming it only represented a small number of police officers.
Adrian Gaugler of the Conference of Cantonal Police Commanders went further, threatening the officers with sanctions if they refused to enforce the measures.
“An officer who refuses to enforce the law can be punished,” said Gaugler.
“Police refusing to enforce coronavirus measures is not unique to Switzerland,” writes Chris Tomlinson.
“Earlier this year, police in the Canadian province of Ontario rejected new powers given by the provincial government that would have allowed them to stop any motorist or pedestrian and demand to know where they live and why they were not at home.”
As we previously highlighted, after lockdown was imposed in Switzerland, calls to private investigators soared as a result of people wanting their neighbors investigated for making too much noise.
The big question: Why should someone who has had Covid need the vaccine?
By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | August 10, 2021
LAST week TCW Defending Freedom writer Frederick Edward tweeted this eminently reasonable question: If the purpose of vaccination is to give antibodies, then why should he, as someone who’s already had Covid, have the vaccine?
Of course there is no rational or reasonable explanation. Nor is it explicable why, given the levels of testing to which the government is subjecting the population, it does not add antibody testing to the mix.
It is unreasonable and Todd Zywicki, an American law professor, is determined to demonstrate this. In an article for the Wall Street Journal he explains why he is suing his employer, the highly rated George Mason University in Virginia, a state institution which is mandating Covid vaccines. In sum, it is that since he already has natural immunity, there can be no justification for a coercive violation of his bodily autonomy.
He explains that although vaccination is unnecessary and potentially risky, the only other options open to him are to teach remotely or to seek a medical exemption that would require him to wear a mask, remain socially distanced from faculty or students during, say, office hours, and submit to weekly testing. In which case, he writes:
‘It would be impossible for me to perform my duties to the best of my ability under such conditions. The administration has threatened those who don’t submit with disciplinary action, including termination of employment. This week the public-interest lawyers at the New Civil Liberties Alliance filed suit on my behalf, challenging the university’s mandatory vaccination requirement for those with naturally acquired immunity. This coercive mandate violates my constitutional right to bodily integrity for no compelling reason.’
He cites clinical studies from Israel, the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, England and elsewhere that ‘have demonstrated beyond a doubt that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 provides robust and durable protection against reinfection comparable to or better than that provided by the most effective vaccines’ and goes on to question the approval of vaccines with less efficacy than natural immunity, referencing the World Health Organisation conclusion: ‘Current evidence points to most individuals developing strong protective immune responses following natural infection with SARS-CoV-2.’
Even more interesting is the centering of his case around the danger of vaccination to those who have previously contracted and recovered from Covid:
‘It isn’t merely unnecessary for me to get the shot. It’s potentially dangerous. Covid-recovered individuals have been mostly excluded from the vaccine clinical trials, rendering any claims about the purported safety for this group largely speculative. Moreover, clinical evidence has suggested that Covid survivors suffer more frequent and more serious side effects from vaccination than those who have never been infected.
‘The onslaught of the Delta variant in recent weeks has reinforced the lessons about the robust protection afforded by natural immunity. Unlike the current vaccines, which are designed to target the spike protein of the virus, natural immunity recognizes the entire complement of SARS-CoV-2 proteins and thus protects against a greater array of variants.
‘Thus even as vaccine breakthrough infections multiply around the world, natural immunity is robust to the Delta and other variants. With respect to the Gamma variant, a recent analysis of an outbreak among a small group of mine workers in French Guiana found that 60 per cent of fully vaccinated miners suffered breakthrough infections compared with zero among those with natural immunity.
‘And whereas the vaccine’s protection may wane faster than expected, the latest estimates on the durability of natural immunity stretch to at least 11 months, the duration of most follow-up studies. Some 16 months after contracting Covid I am still testing positive for antibodies. In fact, researchers have discovered that the antibodies produced by natural infection continue to evolve to generate “increasingly broad and potent antibodies that are resistant to mutations” compared with the more static “antibodies elicited by vaccination”.’
We will follow his case with interest.
The new assumption that only by vaccination can herd immunity can be achieved is a false one – it is not science. It needs to be challenged in the courts here too.
CDC has a plan to stick the “high risk” in special camps, which will most likely enhance transmission of Covid
Green Zones or Concentration Camps?
By Meryl Nass, MD | August 9, 2021
For people who still think that public health dictates are intended for our benefit, will you still think so when the public health police decide to remove granny from her home to a high risk camp, where latrines will be provided? And hopefully food and medical care, all based on the refugee model? This was updated a year ago, so it has probably changed in the interim.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/global-covid-19/shielding-approach-humanitarian.html
The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available. Please check the CDC website periodically for updates.
What is the Shielding Approach? 1
The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.
Operational Considerations
The shielding approach requires several prerequisites for effective implementation. Several are addressed, including access to healthcare and provision of food. However, there are several prerequisites which require additional considerations. Table 2 presents the prerequisites or suggestions as stated in the shielding guidance document (column 1) and CDC presents additional questions and considerations alongside these prerequisites (column 2).
Table 2: Suggested Prerequisites per the shielding documents and CDC’s Operational Considerations for Implementation
Suggested Prerequisites
*As stated in the shielding document*
- Each green zone has a dedicated latrine/bathing facility for high-risk individuals
- To minimize external contact, each green zone should include able-bodied high-risk individuals capable of caring for residents who have disabilities or are less mobile
- Otherwise, designate low-risk individuals for these tasks, preferably who have recovered from confirmed COVID-19 and are assumed to be immune.
- The green zone and living areas for high-risk residents should be aligned with minimum humanitarian (SPHERE) standards.6
Considerations as suggested by CDC
- The shielding approach advises against any new facility construction to establish green zones; however, few settings will have existing shelters or communal facilities with designated latrines/bathing facilities to accommodate high-risk individuals. In these settings, most latrines used by HHs are located outside the home and often shared by multiple HHs.
- If dedicated facilities are available, ensure safety measures such as proper lighting, handwashing/hygiene infrastructure, maintenance and disinfection of latrines.
- Ensure facilities can accommodate high-risk individuals with disabilities, children and separate genders at the neighborhood/camp-level.
- This may be difficult to sustain, especially if the caregivers are also high risk. As caregivers may often will be family members, ensure that this strategy is socially or culturally acceptable.
- Currently, we do not know if prior infection confers immunity.
- The shielding approach requires strict adherence to infection, prevention and control (IPC) measures. They require, uninterrupted availability of soap, water, hygiene/cleaning supplies, masks or cloth face coverings, etc. for all individuals in green zones. Thus, it is necessary to ensure minimum public health standards6 are maintained and possibly supplemented to decrease the risk of other outbreaks outside of COVID-19. Attaining and maintaining minimum SPHERE6 standards is difficult in these settings for the general population.8,9,10 Users should consider that provision of services and supplies to high risk individuals could be at the expense of low-risk residents, putting them at increased risk for other outbreaks.
French cafés sit EMPTY as police RAID outdoor diners, after Macron extends vaccine pass to restaurants
RT | August 9, 2021
Police in France have begun enforcing the vaccination pass mandate to enter cafés and restaurants, leading to many of their tables being empty during the usually busy lunchtime, as the French lunched on public benches instead.
On Monday, President Emmanuel Macron’s government extended the controversial ‘pass sanitaire’ requirement to dining venues, even outdoor ones, disregarding the weekend of mass protests that drew at least 250,000 people onto the streets across France.
A video doing the rounds on social media, shot by a Reuters photographer, showed French police checking diners’ papers. Those without the pass face a €135 *($158) fine, which increases to €9,000 ($10,560) for a repeat offense.
By lunchtime, many sidewalk cafés were sitting completely empty as their regular customers chose instead to sit on public benches outside – according to a multitude of photos and comments posted on social media, anyway.
Another video showed outdoor venues with few diners on the Champs Élysées, Paris’ main thoroughfare.
There were photos of empty tables right across the city at times when such places would ordinarily be full.
The famous Grande Brasserie, near the Bastille square, had a few customers inside, but no one out on its patio. One Twitter user speculated that the outdoor seating areas were empty as the result of some kind of nationwide boycott of the health pass.
The pass, introduced by Macron to compel vaccinations against Covid-19, has been mandatory for entrance to museums, movie theaters, swimming pools, and other venues since July 21. The courts have also ruled that it was constitutional to mandate vaccinations for healthcare workers, some of whom have gone on strike in protest.
Facing a rising number of Covid-19 cases attributed to the Delta variant of the virus, the French authorities have pressed hard to vaccinate everyone. Meanwhile, vaccine makers Pfizer and Moderna have drastically increased the price of their vaccines in the European Union.
Rulings against Palestinian inmates show Saudi desire to normalize relations with Israel: Yemen’s Ansarullah
Press TV – August 9, 2021
Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement has condemned Saudi Arabia for handing down harsh verdicts against dozens of Palestinian inmates in the kingdom, some of whom were given jail terms of up to 22 years, over alleged support for the Palestinian Hamas movement, saying the verdicts clearly reflect the Riyadh regime’s desire to normalize relations with Israel.
“We strongly condemn Saudi rulings against Palestinians living in the country. We consider such verdicts a poisonous stab in the back of the Palestinian cause, and a message of friendship and obedience to Israel,” Ansarullah’s political bureau said in a statement.
It added, “Given our knowledge about the Saudi regime’s nature and its eagerness to normalize ties with the Zionist enemy, we call upon Muslim nations to show solidarity with the Palestinian prisoners, and to press for their immediate release.”
“Sana’a is ready to release Saudi prisoners in exchange for the freedom of Palestinians being kept behind bars in the Riyadh regime’s detention,” Ansarullah said.
A Saudi court on Sunday issued various sentences against 69 Palestinians and Jordanians.
The group was detained in March 2018 during a wave of arrests by Saudi authorities on a group of long-term Palestinian and Jordanian residents in the kingdom on alleged links to Hamas.
Sources in the besieged Gaza Strip have previously said that they believed the crackdown was linked to warming ties between Israel and Riyadh.
An official Hamas source said last year that the majority of the detainees were Hamas members, who had resided in the Persian Gulf country for decades, accusing Saudi Arabia of “targeting everyone who is linked with resistance” against the Israeli occupation.
Several Palestinians have been detained since February 2019 and are facing trial before a Saudi terrorism court.
The Saudi court sentenced Hamas representative in Saudi Arabia Mohammed al-Khudairi to 15 years in prison. His son, Hani, was sentenced to three years, Turkey’s official Anadolu news agency reported.
Khudairi’s brother, Abd al-Majeed, said the sentence includes “clemency for half the term.”
Khudairi, 82, was a veteran Hamas leader responsible for managing the relationship with Saudi Arabia for two decades.
Hamas, meanwhile, condemned the sentences handed out on Sunday, calling them “unjust” and saying those sentenced had done nothing to harm Saudi Arabia.
“We were shocked … by the rulings issued by the Saudi judiciary against a large number of Palestinians and Jordanians residing in the kingdom,” Hamas said in a statement.
“We deplore the harsh and undeserved sentences against most of them. All they did was support their cause and their people, to which they belong, without any offence to the kingdom and its people,” it added.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad movement also condemned the rulings.
Over the past three years, the Saudi authorities have also deported more than 100 Palestinians from the kingdom, mostly on charges of supporting Hamas financially, politically or through social networking sites.
The Riyadh regime has imposed strict control over Palestinian funds in Saudi Arabia since the end of 2017.
Is Ashli Babbit’s Killer Guilty of Murder?
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | August 9, 2021
There are those who think that the so-called riot or so-called insurrection in the Capitol last January justified the killing of Ashli Babbitt, the Air Force veteran who was shot dead by a still-unidentified Capitol police officer during the melee.
Not so! The power to use deadly force is strictly limited, even if the event was in fact a “riot” or an “insurrection” rather than simply a protest that got out of hand.
The killer’s lawyer, Mark Schamel, understands that, even if journalists within the mainstream media do not. He stated, “Lethal force is appropriate if the situation puts you or others in fear of imminent bodily harm.”
Well, except for the fact that what Schamel stated is not correct. The test for the use of deadly force is not whether the police officer is in fear of imminent bodily harm. The test is whether the officer reasonably believes that the subject poses a significant threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or others.
In other words, just because a police officer is scared that someone might do harm to him is not enough, under the law, to justify his killing the person. The police officer must reasonably believe that he is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death.
It is undisputed that Ashli Babbit was unarmed. In fact, it is also undisputed that during this so-called riot or so-called insurrection, none of the Capitol protestors were shooting anyone.
Light jail sentences
Federal Judge Randolph Moss seems to get that. That’s got to be the reason he meted out an 8-month jail sentence to Paul Hodgins, another Capitol protestor, for participating in the melee. Isn’t that a rather light sentence for someone who participated in what the mainstream media continues to call a “riot,” an “insurrection,” and a “grave assault on democracy”? Don’t some people who get convicted of DUI receive higher jail sentences than that?
Why, even federal prosecutors were recommending to the judge to give Hodgins no more than a 15-21 month sentence. Interestingly, at sentencing federal prosecutors compared Hodgins’ conduct to that of a “domestic terrorist.” Yet, there was a problem with that theory: They didn’t charge him with domestic terrorism. Did they just forget to do so?
According to the CBSNews.com, “So far, nearly 20 Capitol rioters have entered guilty pleas, and two have been sentenced for misdemeanor crimes: one, Anna Morgan-Lloyd, was sentenced to three years probation and no jail time, and another, Michael Curzio, was sentenced to six months imprisonment, although the courts credited him for the nearly six months he had already spent incarcerated as he waited for the courts to hear his case.”
What? How in the world can participating in a “riot” (or an “insurrection” or a “grave assault on democracy) be only a misdemeanor rather than a felony? How can “rioters” and “insurrectionists” and “grave assaulters on democracy” be receiving probation or extremely light jail sentences?
Where is Robert Mueller when we need him? He clearly should be summoned out of retirement to help these federal prosecutors and federal judges understand how serious this “riot,” “insurrection,” and “grave assault on democracy” really was.
Secrecy vs transparency
A video of the Ashli Babbitt killing proves that the protestors weren’t killing anyone. In fact, there were Capitol police on the protestors’ side of the door who were guarding the door that the protestors were trying to bash down. No one touched those police officers. Since the door was made of glass, it is a virtual certainty that Ashli Babbitt’s killer saw those police officers and the fact that Babbitt and the other protestors were doing nothing to harm them.
So, what caused that still-unidentified Capitol police officer to kill Ashli Babbitt? Did he mistakenly think he saw a gun in her hand? Given that she hadn’t even broken through the door, what caused him to think that he was in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death? Did he simply get scared and decide to shoot? What was his level of training? Was he a newbie Capitol police officer? Had he received adequate training on the use of deadly force? Did he have a misunderstanding with respect to when he was authorized to use deadly force?
We don’t know the answers to these questions because the killer’s version of events is still shrouded in secrecy. We know that federal prosecutors have exonerated him but that’s no big surprise. What’s necessary is transparency. For one thing, there is absolutely no reason to keep the killer’s identity secret. Just because a police officer might be scared of retaliation for killing a citizen is no reason to keep his identity and his version of events secret. The criminal justice system doesn’t operate like that. Police work is inherently dangerous business. If people don’t want to incur that danger, then they shouldn’t become police officers. To use danger surrounding police work to shroud a police killing of a citizen in secrecy is totally illegitimate. Justice demands full transparency of all matters relating to Ashli Babbitt’s killing.
As more facts have come out about Ashli Babbitt and her life, one thing has become painfully clear: This 35-year-old wife and mother would never have threatened that still-unidentified police officer or anyone else with serious bodily injury or death. Therefore, the obvious question arises: What caused that still-unidentified police officer to kill Ashli Babbitt? Her family has a right to know. So do the American people.
Time is running out to stop the ‘vaccine’ control project
By Daniel Miller | TCW Defending Freedom | August 9, 2021
WE HAVE a limited time to act. The essence of the situation now is clear: what is still perceived by many as a medical emergency is in reality a highly organised global corporate and political agenda. This agenda is directed towards imposing unimaginable control over the global human population though mandatory vaccination, connected to a digital passport, which will be linked to digital currency and a social credit score.
These technologies enable power to be centralised to a level of intensity never seen before in history.
At the controls of the machine will be the network which has orchestrated everything that has unfolded over the past eighteen months.
Here is what has happened in Great Britain since March last year. The Ministry of Health under the direction of Matt Hancock has presided over the deaths of tens of thousands of the elderly in care homes. These deaths were not caused by deciding to lock down too slowly, but were the outcome of a series of political decisions.
These included turning care homes into prisons, and banning relatives from visiting, and placing an enormous order for Midazolam, a sedative which has been used for euthanasia.
At this time the government also reduced hospital capacity, emptied untested and sick patients into care homes, suppressed the early treatment use of safe generic drugs and initiated a behavioural control campaign directed towards increasing fear.
If there had been a premeditated plan to maximise deaths while retaining plausible deniability that this plan existed, how would it have unfolded differently?
The government has now converted hotels into prisons and incarcerates everyone who enters Britain from an arbitrary list of countries, drawn up without clear logic, and subject to sudden rapid changes. Leaving and returning to the country now involves submission to a regimen of humiliating, pointless and expensive testing based on Drosten’s defective PCR tests and a disinformation myth of asymptomatic spread.
Why are they doing this? To confuse and to humiliate, to deter travel, and to desensitise the population to a new normality of arbitrary imprisonment without trial.
Now the government has mandated the compulsory vaccination of care home workers even as evidence accumulates that the global universal vaccination programme, an unprecedented policy in the history of public health, following the unprecedented global lockdown, is a medical catastrophe with numbers of major side effects including death reported in the aftermath of vaccination climbing into tens of thousands, and still not ending the pandemic.
Mandating any medical treatment as a condition of employment writes medical apartheid into law; the fact that this treatment might be useless (since the ‘vaccines’ do not prevent contracting, transmitting or even dying from the virus) as well as dangerous indicates a darker logic.
The extension of the vaccine programme to children, who are at less risk from the virus than they are from vaccines, suggests the vaccines have a function independent of their role in serving as a vaccine passport Trojan horse. Children will be harmed and die due to this policy, having already been tortured for a year with pointless mandatory testing and propaganda baselessly accusing them of potentially becoming accidental murderers if they did not comply with government decrees. Meanwhile Carrie Antoinette Ceaușescu is pregnant once again, with Johnson having done to her what he has been doing to the country.
For the vaccines to receive regulatory approval (if not for further reasons) effective, safe and cheap treatments have been ruthlessly suppressed. In March 2020 the Lancet, once the most reputable medical journal in the world, now a propaganda organ for the global network, published a fake paper claiming hydroxychloroquine had a negative effect; the paper was eventually retracted. One of the largest hydroxychloroquine factories in the world burned down after an explosion. The highly effective drug ivermectin remains suppressed in the UK and criminalised in other countries. If these drugs had been made available tens of thousands of people would be still alive today. Instead official policy has increased the death toll on the road to mandating vaccines.
Global government intends to make recurring vaccinations mandatory, indefinitely, to access social life. For this purpose they have stockpiled 450million doses of vaccines, enough to vaccinate each member of the British population seven times; other countries have similar figures. They will later order more. What is being implemented is compulsory repeated vaccination for perpetuity.
Towards this goal the facts about the danger of the virus and now the dangers of the vaccines have been ruthlessly suppressed, and bogus information, lies, neurolinguistic programming, and pseudo-scientific models promoted in their place.
A long and growing list of authoritative and conscientious scientists and doctors (including John Ioannidis, Mike Yeadon, Martin Kulldorff, Jay Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta, Didier Raoult, Scott Atlas, Peter McCullough, Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, Sucharit Bhakdi, Robert Malone) have been censored and defamed. In their place we’ve been presented with charlatans, propaganda actors and fanatics.
Sweden, Florida and Texas, which have all defied the global line on lockdowns, are no longer mentioned, while Haiti’s Moise, Burundi’s Nkurunziza, and Tanzania’s John Magufuli are all dead, in Magufuli’s case weeks after the Guardian published a Gates Foundation-sponsored article demanding action.
This is a shameful period in human history and with every day that passes the shame of what we have already allowed to happen deepens. We have failed to stop a systematic policy which has killed millions around the world and will kill millions more. We have failed to stop the imposition of policy of child abuse on a national scale. We have failed to stop the imposition of lockdown policy which has achieved nothing but the immiseration of hard-working men and women. We are facing government by mercenaries, tyrants, propagandists and fanatics.
Men and women who have already shown courage must continue to do so, and others must now find their courage.
Doctors who have sacrificed their ethics to collaborate in this grotesque charade must redress the balance and remember their duty is to patients, not the government, and not to science.
Apathetic journalists who for eighteen months have functioned as the mindless relays of a criminal regime must recognise their duty is to truth and to the people.
The judiciary, who for eighteen months have deferred to rule by diktat and extended their goodwill to tyranny must recognise, like some of their colleagues in Spain, Alberta, Lisbon, Weimar and elsewhere, that their duty is to justice and human rights, and that these cannot be suspended under any circumstances whatsoever without being destroyed completely.
The vaccination programme must be stopped, or it will never end. Instead, it will become the basis of a new post-social contract modelled on the periodically updated terms of social media in which shared political and corporate interests will make humanity a resource to be farmed.
The Government, who answer to these interests, will seek to reimpose a lockdown with additional restrictions in the autumn. They must be stopped by every moral means.
Featured Video
House Resolution Calls for Tech Companies to Censor Speech
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Israel’s recurring use of terror on civilians
By Bob Finch | January 26, 2009
Insanely disproportionate use of violence against unarmed civilians… continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- NATO courts screenwriters to embed alliance messaging in film, TV
- Iran replaces UAE ports with Pakistan corridor to break US blockade
- Iran sets one-month deadline for end to US-Israeli war, blockade: Report
- At the edge of the Strait: A superpower in a narrow sea
- Iran unveils new control measures over Strait of Hormuz transit
- House Resolution Calls for Tech Companies to Censor Speech
- Ceasefire no longer viable after 200 days of Israeli violations: Hamas
- Israeli strikes intensify across southern Lebanon, casualties reported
- Left in Disbelief: Israel in Panic over Hezbollah FPV Drone Nightmare
- Trump Taps Israel Lobbyist From Mossad Cutout FDD To Join Iran Negotiations
- If Americans Knew
- As Palestinians die, Ben-Gvir celebrates birthday with golden noose cake – Daily Update
- Israel’s New Ambassador to the ‘Christian World’ Served as Envoy to Azerbaijan During the Ethnic Cleansing of Christians from Nagorno-Karabakh
- US set to sell $1B “Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System” to Israel – Daily Update
- Israeli Strikes Kill at Least 32 Across S Lebanon, Including Children – Amid “Ceasefire”
- Israel to pour $730m into propaganda arm amid reputational crisis
- Real Cost of Iran War Likely Double the $25 Billion Figure the Pentagon Gave to Congress
- Israel conducts farthest-ever strike in long history of attacks on Gaza humanitarian aid flotillas
- In Gaza, Israel commits 10+ ceasefire violations a day – Daily Update
- US ships 6,500 tons of munitions, equipment to Israel in 24 hours
- A New Library in Gaza Rises From the Ashes of Destruction
- No Tricks Zone
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
Aletho News 