Willem Engel Interview – The Fight For Freedom In The COVID Age & The Battle For Our Very Humanity
Willem Engel has been neutralized by the Netherlands/EU Totalitarian Regime
By Taylor Hudak | The Last American Vagabond | June 16, 2021
Joining me today is scientist and activist Willem Engel, here to discuss his ongoing legal efforts to fight back against what many are referring to as ‘crimes against humanity’ being committed under the guise of fighting COVID-19 – and rightly so – as well as what’s at the center of this battle, and that is the fight for humanity itself.
(https://www.rokfin.com/TLAVagabond)
(https://odysee.com/@TLAVagabond:5)
(https://www.bitchute.com/channel/24yVcta8zEjY/)
Source Links:
https://www.irishtimes.com/topics/topics-7.1213540?article=true&tag_person=Willem+Engel
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56084466
https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/02/police-backpedal-on-congratulations-for-curfew-court-case-win/
End the Draft Permanently
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | June 17, 2021
Recently the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider a challenge to the all-male draft. The plaintiffs in the case argued that excluding women from the draft was unconstitutional. Apparently the Court is simply letting Congress decide the issue.
I’ve got an idea — an idea grounded in freedom. How about abolishing the draft — and, of course, draft registration? In fact, better yet, how about enacting a constitutional amendment prohibiting the draft from ever being enacted again?
Young people might think the matter is irrelevant, given that there hasn’t been conscription since the Vietnam War. That is naive, wishful, and dangerous thinking. Every 18-year-old male is required, on pain of a felony conviction, to register for the draft. The reason? Because in the event of some major foreign war, make no mistake about it: The Pentagon will not hesitate to restore the draft because it will need soldiers to fight, kill, and die. Young men — and also most likely young women — will begin receiving draft notices ordering them to report to military facilities for training and “service” to “their country.”
The fact that the national-security establishment continues doing everything it can to gin up such a war — like with Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea — makes the the possibility of a draft even more likely. And once it happens, there is little anyone will be able to do to stop it. In fact, in the event of another major foreign war, I wouldn’t be surprised if they started jailing people for just challenging the draft, as U.S. officials did in World War I.
There is no way to reconcile conscription with the principles of a genuinely free society. Either people are the masters of their own lives or the government is their master. It’s one or the other.
With conscription, the government wields the power to order a person to leave his family and his regular life and report to a government facility to serve the state. That is the opposite of freedom. In a genuinely free society, a person has the right to live his life the way he wants — free of governmental interference, so long as his conduct is peaceful and non-fraudulent.
In fact, there is actually no difference between slavery and conscription. Under slavery, a person is being force to serve his master. That’s what conscription is based on. It’s a system in which the individual is being forced to serve his master, with the master being the federal government, and specifically the Pentagon.
Under 19th-century slavery in America, the slave’s service usually consisted of work on a plantation. Under conscription, the work consists of military training on a Pentagon-run facility and then killing, maiming, or torturing people on orders in some faraway land. But that’s just a distinction without a difference. What matters is that under both systems, the individual is being forced to serve his master.
Proponents of the draft say that sometimes it is necessary to force people to fight for “freedom.” But that’s ridiculous because if you have a system where the government can conscript people, you no longer have a free society. Freedom has been destroyed in the name of protecting freedom.
Moreover, when you have a genuinely free society, you don’t need to force people to fight for their freedom. A free people will fight vociferously to protect their freedom. In fact, foreign regimes that attack and invade a genuinely free society soon find that they have swallowed a porcupine.
The problem is that the U.S. government wages foreign wars — that is, wars in faraway lands, where no foreign regime has attacked or invaded the United States. In those wars, many Americans aren’t interested in giving up their lives to fight the “enemy.” World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam come to mind.
In every one of those wars, Americans had to be forced to go fight, kill, and die. Oh, yes, they were all told that they were fighting for their “freedom,” but that was palpable nonsense.
If any of the enemies in those wars were really invading the United States, there would have been more than enough Americans ready and willing to defend their country, their lives, and their freedom. No one would have had to have been forced to fight.
Yes, I know, in World War II Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. But my hunch is that many Americans realized that President Roosevelt had manipulated Japan into attacking in order to circumvent widespread American opposition to entry into the war. Moreover, many Americans realized that Japan never intended to invade and take over the United States, Instead, it was simply trying to knock out the Pacific fleet to give Japan a free hand to secure oil in the Dutch East Indies, as a way to overcome FDR’s pre-war oil embargo on Japan. Moreover, if FDR had not been successful in maneuvering Japan into “firing the first shot,” Germany would not have declared war on the United States.
If you’ve never read the essay “Conscription” by Daniel Webster, I highly recommend it:
Today, the American people have a unique opportunity to lead the world to a genuinely free society. A great place to begin would be a constitutional amendment, modeled after the 13th Amendment, that prohibits conscription forever.
Putin Lashes Out at US Regime After Meeting with Biden
teleSUR – June 16, 2021
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday lashed out at the United States on arms control, human rights, cyber-attacks, among other issues, after meeting with his U.S. counterpart Joe Biden.
“The West believes that the Russian policy is unpredictable. Well, let me reciprocate. The U.S. withdrawal from the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty in 2002 wasn’t predictable,” Putin said at a solo press conference.
He criticized the U.S. on human rights, citing U.S. attacks in Afghanistan and the existence of the Guantanamo Bay prison.
“One single strike can kill … (about) 120 people. All right, assuming this was a mistake that happens in a war, but shooting from a drone, (at) an unarmed crowd, clearly the civilian crowd, what is this about? How would you call that? And who’s responsible for this?” said Putin.
“And how would you call this person? Who is the killer now?” he asked.
On Cyberattacks, Putin said that it is of vital importance globally, “for the United States in particular, and for Russia as well in the same volume.”
Putin noted that his country has not yet received any response from the U.S. on Russia’s request regarding cyber-attacks this year.
The White House on Wednesday posted on its website a U.S.-Russia Presidential Joint Statement on Strategic Stability.
The statement said that the two heads of state noted that the two countries “have demonstrated that, even in periods of tension, they are able to make progress on our shared goals of ensuring predictability in the strategic sphere, reducing the risk of armed conflicts and the threat of nuclear war.”
“The recent extension of the New START Treaty exemplifies our commitment to nuclear arms control. Today, we reaffirm the principle that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” said the statement.
The summit between Putin and Biden officially kicked off here Wednesday afternoon, the first of its kind since Biden took office in January 2021.
Letter to Canadian Transport Minister: Israeli Apartheid Not Welcome in Canadian Ports #BlocktheBoat

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network | June 15, 2021
The following letter was sent today to Canada’s Transport Minister Omar Alghabra and called on “the Canadian government to stop legitimizing the crimes of apartheid…and suspend all instances of Zim-operated ships docking and unloading in Canadian ports.” This action is part of the growing demand that Canada must hold Israel accountable, through economic sanctions and a bilateral arms embargo.
June 15, 2021
Minister of Transport Omar Alghabra
Ottawa, OntarioIn recent weeks, people of conscience in Canada watched in horror as the Israeli regime ruthlessly targeted Palestinians from all regions of historic Palestine. What started as a popular movement to #SaveSheikhJarrah residents from further ethnic cleansing expanded into a broad unity of Palestinians from Jerusalem to Gaza to Haifa to Toronto and Vancouver all sending the same message. Palestinians will no longer accept the status quo of Israeli apartheid.
As part of this burgeoning movement, Palestinian-Canadians and their supporters have actively participated in rallies, pickets and #BlockTheBoat actions. The latter refers to the efforts to stop Zim-operated ships from either docking in, or unloading, at U.S., Canadian and other international ports.
Zim Integrated Shipping Services Ltd is Israel’s largest and oldest cargo shipping company, dealing in Israeli manufactured military technology, armaments and logistics equipment, as well as consumer goods.
The Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) and a large coalition of all major Palestinian workers unions and professional associations have called on fellow trade unions and workers worldwide to boycott Israel and businesses that are complicit with its apartheid regime. They specifically urge “refus[ing] to handle Israeli goods” and “supporting [union] members refusing to build Israeli weapons.”
Last month, and in response to the above appeal from Palestinian trade unions, South African trade unions refused handling cargo from an Israeli ship in Durban. Dockworkers in Italy have also successfully blocked a recent shipment of munitions and armaments destined for Israel.
At Canada’s largest port in Vancouver, there was a successful community picket on June 8 that tied up both the Port entrance and a busy intersection; activists from a diverse range of groups stated clearly – “Israeli Apartheid Not Welcome in Vancouver Ports”. (The same message was also delivered on June 14 at the Prince Rupert Port.)
Port Authorities in Canada fall under the Ministry of Transport. As such, Mr. Alghabra, allowing and enabling such Israeli apartheid profiteering makes both the ports and the Canadian government further complicit in the ongoing dispossession of the Palestinians. Both B’tselem and Human Rights Watch have been clear in exposing the system of Israeli governance as apartheid. We, the undersigned organizations, expect the Canadian government to stop legitimizing the crimes of apartheid, and to refuse to give economic incentives to such abhorrent behaviour.
Your ministry is already mired in controversy for refusing to cancel a contract with Elbit Systems to purchase one of their drones. Who would have imagined that the Canadian Ministry of Transport would be so entangled with Israeli apartheid? We call on you to observe your government’s alleged respect for international law and human rights and suspend all instances of Zim-operated ships docking and unloading in Canadian ports.
Popular protest is not going to stop as long as Palestinians are not free.
c.c. PM of Canada, Justin Trudeau
Vancouver Fraser Port AuthoritySigned:
BDS Vancouver-Coast Salish Territories
Canada Palestine Association
Palestinian Youth Movement Vancouver
Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity NetworkEndorsed by:
Anti-Imperialist Alliance, Ottawa
BAYAN Canada
Canadian Peace Congress
Communist Party of Canada
Gabriela BC
Independent Jewish Voices Vancouver
Just Peace Advocates
Niagara Movement for Justice in Palestine Israel
OPRA – Oakville Palestinian Rights Association
Palestinian Canadian Community Centre – Palestine House
Poetic Justice Foundation
Regina Peace Council
Sulong UBC
West Coast Coalition Against Racism Society
The EEOC Did NOT Say Federal Law Permits Requiring a COVID-19 Vaccine
Informed Consent Action Network | June 16, 2021
In the article, “Can employers require workers to get the COVID vaccine?”, Bailey Aldridge claims that, given the updated rules of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), “your employer can require you to get a COVID vaccine.” Aldridge even claims that “The EEOC says there are no federal laws that prevent an employer from requiring employees who are physically in the workplace to get the COVID-19 vaccine.”
The EEOC’s guidance, however, does not claim that an employer can legally require an emergency use COVID-19 vaccine. The EEOC guidance merely states that the “federal EEO [Equal Employment Opportunity] laws do not prevent an employer from requiring” an emergency authorized COVID-19 vaccine. That is not surprising because the EEO laws apply only to discrimination based on certain protected classes, such as race, religion and national origin.
Federal law is, of course, far broader than the narrow EEO laws. In recognizing that there are other federal laws that do prohibit an employer from requiring a COVID-19 vaccine, the EEOC’s guidance also states that, “These three vaccines were granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) by the FDA” and that, “It is beyond the EEOC’s jurisdiction to discuss the legal implications of EUA or the FDA approach.”
When one reviews the FDA’s EUA and its approved labeling, a.k.a. “fact sheets,” for each COVID-19 vaccine, they each clearly provide that: “It is [the vaccine recipient’s] choice to receive or not receive the COVID-19 Vaccine.” The reason each fact sheet includes this language is because the same section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that authorizes the FDA to grant an EUA also requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to “ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed … of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”
That same section of the Act also authorized the Secretary, and only the Secretary, to provide the “consequences” for refusing to receive an EUA product and the EUAs for each COVID-19 vaccine do not include permission to terminate an employee for refusing the vaccine.
ICAN hopes that the Department of Justice will do its job and enforce the federal law prohibiting mandating an EUA vaccine and will continue to push it to enforce this important law.
A glimpse inside the UK’s “quarantine hotels”
OffGuardian | June 16, 2021
A short video was recently brought to our attention on twitter. It shows a man and woman (off-camera) pulling up to a chainlink fence around a concrete yard and engaging in a brief conversation with a man on the other side.
The man is one of several dozen people walking in slow, counter-clockwise circuits around what appears to be an un-used car park. He’s polite to the strangers, discussing how tight security is, how many guards there are on each floor, and how often they’re allowed outside for this “exercise”.
At that point a security guard comes up and tells the man he’s not allowed to talk through the fence, and a brief argument ensues. The guard tells the people in the car that they cannot talk to anyone inside the facility without permission from “the office”. After moments of insisting the guard desists, likely to report the incident to his supervisor.
The couple in the car and the stranger behind the fence part on friendly terms, with the man remarking that he paid seventeen-hundred and fifty pounds to stay there.
Because this isn’t a prison or detention facility, it’s a “quarantine hotel”.
You can watch the video here:
[NOTE: This is a re-upload, with some discussion, from the channel Hugo Talks Some More. The original we have been unable to find, it was likely taken down. (If you’re aware of a copy of the original, or who filmed it, do let us know. We’d like to credit the people who did the filming.]
The quarantine hotels have been in the mainstream media before, with the reporting focusing on them being expensive, having terrible food and being dull. But this little clip offers something worse than that – a little glimpse of the dehumanising nature of detention. The mission-creep of arbitrary rules, enforced to the letter by people either too ignorant to know better or willingly malign, is an oft-repeated motif in human history. It never bodes well.
It’s telling to contrast (as Hugo does at the end of the video) the grey building – with its grey fence and grey yard full of people milling in grey circles – with the recent G7 summit in Cornwall.
Not the official photos of the G7, of course, because those are all neatly staged and social distanced, but the leaked photos of the G7 barbecue.
Quarantine “hotel”:

G7 barbecue:

Quarantine “hotel”:

G7 barbecue:

Notice the lack of social distancing. Observe the absence of masks (except for the lowly servants, naturally). And, of course, not one of them had to pay to be there at all. In fact, we literally paid them a salary to do it – and then paid for the catering, alcohol and accommodation too.
Do these “world leaders” look like people in the middle of a life-threatening pandemic to you? Do they look like people that honestly believe they have a chance of catching a terrible disease?

As one of our editors wrote last summer:
When the people giving us these orders do not follow them themselves, they are not showing themselves to be “hypocrites”. They are showing themselves to be liars. They are admitting they don’t really believe what they’re saying.
Clearly, the rules of the “new normal” only apply to ordinary people. And that’s as sure a sign as any that it’s not now – and never was – really about “protecting” anyone. It was always about control.
Hancock: “We Have No Duty Of Care At All To Vaccine Refuseniks!”
By Richie Allen | June 16, 2021
Speaking in the House of Commons this afternoon, Health Secretary Matt Hancock suggested that people who refuse a covid-19 jab, will be refused treatment on the NHS.
Hancock was responding to a question from Tory MP Liam Fox about the vaccine status of those currently receiving hospital treatment for the so-called Delta variant.
Hancock said:
“I think that there is a material difference between the states responsibility to offer the vaccine to all adults and the duty that we have when somebody has not been offered the vaccine is greater than the duty we have when we have offered a vaccine but somebody has chosen not to take it up. And there is a material difference between those two situations.”
Hancock’s colleague Andrea Leadsom interjected and said:
“Can I take (it) one step further? If I choose not to say, not to have a yellow fever jab when I am going to a place that suffers yellow fever, the government of the United Kingdom takes no interest whatsoever in my illness status. So when my right honourable friend says that he has less of a duty, surely what he means is that he has no duty at all. It is for people to take up the vaccine.”
Hancock replied:
“Up to a point and the point is should you take that as an absolute principle, then there is a challenge, should there be an overwhelming demand on the NHS that would impact on others. And of course with a communicable disease, there is an impact on others in terms of spreading the disease so we do have to have an eye to that.
That’s why I phrased it as I did. But in terms of the argument that my right honourable friend is putting, I think she and I concur in the broad thrust of the case being made.”
Nobody in the chamber batted an eyelid. The Secretary of State for Health said that those who refuse a covid-19 vaccine, might be left to die if they contract a respiratory infection and the NHS is otherwise engaged, presumably treating those with vaccine injuries. Welcome to dystopia.
THE PERMANENT NATURE OF “TEMPORARY” TYRANNY
Computing Forever | June 14, 2021
Support my work here: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKf/
UK Already Planning to Extend Lockdown Before First Extension Even Announced

SOPA Images via Getty Image
By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | June 14, 2021
Having first mooted a 2 week delay to lifting lockdown which will today likely become a 4 week delay, government ministers in the UK are already suggesting the lockdown could continue beyond July.
The country was supposed to exit all lockdown restrictions on June 21st, dubbed “freedom day” by the media.
However, Prime Minister Boris Johnson will today announce a four week extension to the restrictions, meaning that Brits had more freedom in July 2020 compared to now despite the vast majority of “vulnerable” people having received the vaccine.
But there’s absolutely no guarantee the lockdown will end next month.
The same advisers who admitted using “mind control” and “totalitarian” fear tactics to terrify the British public into compliance are still fearmongering about the Indian variant of the virus in a bid to prolong restrictions for months longer.
By delaying the lifting of lockdown until September, a “third wave” of COVID will then be pushed into autumn/winter, meaning the narrative that the NHS will be “overwhelmed” can be trotted out once again.
Then it becomes “just one more lockdown to save Christmas” (the same thing Brits were told last Christmas) and around we go over and over again.
Health Minister Ed Argar said today that “it is of course possible” that yet another delay will be needed beyond July 19 due to the “Indian variant.”
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab also acknowledged that there was no “absolute guarantee” that restrictions would be lifted on July 19.
As we highlighted last week, former Communist Party member and current government adviser Susan Michie says that mask mandates and social distancing should continue “forever” and that people should adopt such behaviour just as they did with wearing seatbelts.
A doctor who argued that the UK’s COVID-19 lockdown should remain in place indefinitely also revealed his true thoughts by letting slip the comment, “sadly, it can’t be forever.”
![hebrew_sign2 PETA poster [PETA]](https://i0.wp.com/www.middleeastmonitor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/hebrew_sign2.jpeg?w=462&h=451&quality=85&strip=all&zoom=1&ssl=1)
