Pastor Artur Pawlowski has been issued a warrant for his arrest because he dared to stop some gestapo thugs from illegally entering his church!
Last Easter weekend the mafia’s enforcement arm arrived unannounced at Pastor Pawlowski’s church and he let them know in epic fashion that are not welcomed there! 3 week later the jackboot thugs arrived again attempting to “serve” the Pastor and after he refused a judge decided it was time to send in the toughs to shake the pastor down.
In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth covers the latest Covid-19(84) gestapo news out of Calgary and also the UK where Pastors are being arrested under what can only be described as spiritual warfare!
Pastor Coates and GraceLife Church, represented by the Justice Centre have been charged with violating the Public Health Act for having held normal church services, which were commenced after many months of lockdown restrictions.
Pastor Coates spent one month and six days in jail before his release on March 22, 2021 because he would not sign an agreement to stop pastoring his church according to the congregation’s beliefs.
The GraceLife Church building near Stony Plain, Alberta, has been barricaded by the government for over three weeks, and the locks changed, such that the congregants have gathered for worship at secret locations these last three Sundays.
(See article below for details about the upcoming trial and how challenges to the constitutionality and legality of the lockdown measures will be presented.)
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Trial of Pastor James Coates to Proceed in Edmonton on May 3
EDMONTON: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms today announced that the trial of Pastor James Coates, of GraceLife Church, will proceed on May 3, 2021 at 9:30 AM in Provincial Court in Edmonton, in courtroom 514 of the Edmonton Law Courts.
The trial will proceed for up to four days initially, but will then be adjourned because government lawyers are not yet prepared to present any medical or scientific evidence that might support the health orders under which Pastor Coates is charged. Pastor Coates’ Charter challenge to the constitutionality and legality of Dr. Deena Hinshaw’s lockdown restrictions will be heard by the Court at an unknown later date.
The Provincial Court has determined that the first part of the trial will proceed in Edmonton, instead of Stony Plain, specifically so it can take place in a courtroom that has the infrastructure to permit the expected audience of hundreds to observe the trial virtually.
Earlier this afternoon, Judge Robert Shaigec decided that up to 1,000 people will be permitted to attend the trial virtually through the court’s virtual software. However, the Court has decided that those people will only be able to hear the trial, and not be able to watch it. There will be no video feed. The Judge’s Decision follows a request by the government prosecution lawyer that the trial not be viewable virtually. The prosecution lawyer did not want any images or video stream of her to be viewable during the trial. The Court additionally granted the prosecutor’s request that her name not be used during the trial.
Virtual access to the trial is important as the court has limited the number of people able to attend inside the courtroom to a total of 12 people (of which eight are directly involved with the trial). The Court is allowing two Alberta Health Services (AHS) lawyers to attend personally or via Webex. The Court is allowing two of its own legal counsel (lawyers representing the Provincial Court) to attend. The Court is allowing four members of the media in the courtroom during the trial. Although the Justice Centre is pleased that up to 1,000 people will be able to listen to the trial, it is our position that restricting video access to the trial goes against the open court principle and removes the Crown Prosecutor from public accountability.
Judge Shaigec ruled that a link to access the audio of the trial will be made available by the Court, on the Court’s website prior to the trial. The Justice Centre does not have this link.
Pastor Coates and GraceLife Church, near Stony Plain, Alberta, are charged with violating the Public Health Act for having held normal church services, which were commenced after many months of lockdown restrictions. Pastor Coates spent one month and six days in jail before his release on March 22, 2021 because he would not sign an agreement to stop pastoring his church according to the congregation’s beliefs. The GraceLife Church building has been seized and barricaded by the government for over three weeks such that the congregants have gathered for worship at secret locations these last three Sundays.
Representing Pastor Coates and GraceLife Church, the Justice Centre intends to argue at this Monday, May 3 trial that Pastor Coates’ Charter rights and freedoms have been violated, and the court should therefore throw out the Public Health Act charge against Pastor Coates. One expert witness will be called by the Justice Centre during this first part of the trial.
“The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms requires governments to justify demonstrably – with compelling evidence – any law, policy or health order that violates any of our fundamental freedoms to move, travel, associate, worship, assemble, and express ourselves. This very basic constitutional requirement has been ignored completely by governments at every level in the past 14 months. Unfortunately, the courts have permitted the government to delay facing accountability in regard to Charter violations,” states lawyer John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre.
“By May 3, the government will have had almost fourteen months to assemble proper medical and scientific evidence to justify lockdowns and the resulting violations of our fundamental Charter freedoms. Yet the government cannot or will not put that evidence before the courts. But, somehow, the Alberta government would have us believe that it has enough medical and scientific evidence to shut down hundreds of small businesses, pushing many of them into bankruptcy, and to cancel over 20,000 medically necessary surgeries, and to force Albertans into a third lockdown as of yesterday, with its resulting harms of unemployment, poverty and despair,” continues Carpay.
“The Charter requires Canada’s federal and provincial governments to support and justify restrictions on Charter freedoms whether a court challenge to those restrictions exists or not. The inability or unwillingness of the Alberta government to present medical and scientific evidence at this May 3 trial suggests that lockdown restrictions since March of 2020 are based purely on speculation, not science. If these measures were based on evidence, the government would be able to produce that evidence in court, after almost 14 months of lockdown restrictions,” concludes Carpay.
Some colleges and employers are mandating COVID vaccines, and some states are proposing laws to prohibit vaccine mandates — leaving the unvaccinated to wonder where they stand.
A slew of colleges and universities are embracing COVID vaccine mandates, telling students if they want to attend classes on campus, they’ll need to be vaccinated.
Meanwhile, a look at job postings across the country reveals many employers are requiring job candidates to get vaccinated, or promise to get vaccinated within 30 days of hire.
Whether you’re a job hunter or a college student, you may soon face the prospect that your future plans could hinge on your willingness to get the COVID vaccine. But can colleges and employers legally require it? The answer is … complicated.
Colleges and universities are moving to mandate
More than 100 colleges across the country will require students to receive COVID vaccines in order to attend in-person classes in the fall, though most will allow medical and religious exemptions.
Colorado’s major public universities announced Wednesday they will require students, faculty and staff to get COVID vaccinations before beginning the fall semester. The mandate means more than 170,000 students — most of the state’s college students — will be required to be vaccinated, according to enrollment data from the Colorado Department of Higher Education.
Although private colleges make up the bulk of schools with vaccine mandates, some public universities have also moved to require COVID vaccination. Students and employees of the University System of Maryland will be required to get vaccinated, said Chancellor Jay A. Perman, who is most concerned about the UK virus variant, which he described in his announcement last week as “more contagious.”
“That’s what we’re preparing for,” Perman said, “more infectious, more harmful variants that we think could be circulating on our campuses come fall.”
Rutgers University announced in March it would require all students be vaccinated in order to enroll for the 2021 fall semester. The announcement prompted Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to remind university officials that federal law prohibits mandating products approved under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).
In a letter to Rutgers President Jonathan Holloway, Kennedy, who also serves as chief legal counsel for CHD, wrote:
“Federal law 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) requires that the person to whom an EUA vaccine is administered be advised, ‘of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.’
“This right of refusal stems from the fact that EUA products are, by definition, experimental and forced participation in a medical experiment could result in injury. Under the Nuremberg Code, no one may be coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is ‘absolutely essential.’”
According to I. Glenn Cohen, expert on medical ethics and professor at Harvard Law School, there is no federal guidance for colleges and universities mandating COVID vaccination, but there is a well-established practice of universities mandating students receive specific vaccines as a condition of attendance, with exemptions difficult to obtain.
Cohen pointed to a recent case where the California trial court upheld an influenza vaccine mandate by the University of California, a public university, and drew the analogy to K-12 public school mandates. Public universities are on even surer footing with COVID vaccination requirements because there’s a greater public health risk with COVID, Cohen wrote on the Harvard Law Review Blog.
Private colleges are not required to grant religious exemptions under federal law, though some states have the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRAs), which may be interpreted to require public colleges and universities to provide religious exemptions, Cohen said.
However, both public and private colleges and universities are subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and/or its sister statute the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that require accommodations for students with disabilities, which potentially includes those with medical contraindications to vaccines.
There are also arguments surrounding bodily autonomy and the fact that all COVID vaccines currently approved for EUA in the U.S. are experimental vaccines.
Cohen, like Kennedy, pointed to federal law, which requires notifying recipients “of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product …”
What about employers?
A recent survey gathered data from more than 1,800 in-house lawyers, human resources professionals and C-suite executives to analyze plans, strategies and concerns related to COVID vaccination among their workforces.
Results showed fewer than 0.5% of companies currently mandate COVID vaccination for all employees, 6% plan to mandate it for all workers once vaccines are readily available and/or fully approved by the FDA and 3% said they plan to mandate vaccination only for certain workers, such as those in customer-facing roles.
Of those surveyed, 43% said they were unsure and still weighing the possibility of mandating vaccination, while 12% said they planned to bar unvaccinated employees from certain activities, such as travel or interaction with colleagues or customers.
Colleen Connell, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said government and businesses have the power to impose vaccination requirements to protect public health if justified by data, and the right to refuse vaccines on religious grounds is not absolute.
If people claiming religious exemptions are preventing society from reaching herd immunity, then the “government has a right to insist on vaccinations,” Connell said.
Private employers also have that right as long as they permit religious and public health exemptions and they don’t implement a vaccination program in an arbitrary or discriminatory way — though “hospitals have long required their employees to get annual flu shots,” Connell added.
According to Bloomberg Law, employers generally have legal authority to require their employees get vaccinations, so long as they adhere to federal laws requiring religious and medical accommodations in the workplace. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reaffirmed that authority in December, specific to COVID.
However, as The Defender reported in January, attorneys Mary Holland, CHD president, and Greg Glaser argued states and employers under federal law can’t mandate EUA COVID vaccines.
Holland and Glaser wrote:
“If a vaccine has been issued EUA by the FDA, it is not fully licensed and must be voluntary. A private party, such as an employer, school or hospital cannot circumvent the EUA law, which prohibits mandates. Indeed, the EUA law preventing mandates is so explicit that there is only one precedent case regarding an attempt to mandate an EUA vaccine.”
On April 1, Pfizer and BioNTech offered an updated look at the efficacy of their COVID vaccine. The new efficacy data, plus a safety analysis comprising data from more than 12,000 people who were fully immunized for at least six months, allow Pfizer to file a drug application with the FDA to turn the shot’s EUA into a full approval, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said in a statement.
“They know they’re on very shaky legal ground with mandates while vaccines are EUA,” said Holland. “However, these vaccines will likely be licensed, approved and federally recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in the near future. Yet even then there will be serious legal questions about the validity of licensure and whether these vaccines reach the high threshold for a mandate via Jacobson v. Massachusetts –– the 1905 landmark precedent legalizing vaccine mandates.”
Currently, all 50 states are considering legislation to prevent employers from mandating vaccinations and to protect current and prospective employees who refuse vaccination from discrimination and retaliation.
“I would predict that there will be measures passed in at least a few states that either restrict employers or restrict the concept of a vaccine passport or other proof of vaccination,” said Lowell Pearson, an attorney at Husch Blackwell LLP in Jefferson City, Missouri. Pearson said governors likely don’t have authority to restrict employer mandates via executive orders.
Lawmakers in Missouri are considering HB 838 — which would bar public employers from requiring their workers get vaccinated or imposing vaccine requirements for entry to public spaces.
State legislatures in Ohio, Oklahoma and Tennessee are considering bills that go further than the Missouri measure, proposing a ban on vaccine mandates by any entity, including private-sector employers. Idaho has proposed legislation prohibiting COVID vaccine mandates by any company contracting with the state government.
Only the Wisconsin legislature has sent a bill to the governor this year proposing to ban workplace vaccine mandates, and Democratic Gov. Tony Evers vetoed it.
The Constitutional Rights Centre in Canada held a press conference on April 29 to announce that fifteen active and four retired police officers have launched an application in Ontario Superior Court to seek clarification on the province’s Covid measures. They are also challenging their enforcement as breaching and violating their police oath which includes upholding the Constitution.
Their Notice of Application can be viewed on the Constitutional Rights Centre website at: constitutionalrightscentre.ca
Minneapolis, MN — On April 11, 2021, just miles from where George Floyd took his last breaths on Earth as they were squeezed from his body by officer Derek Chauvin, Daunte Wright was targeted by police over an alleged expired tag. Because the American police state is a violent behemoth which knows no self-restraint, a few moments into the stop and Wright would be killed at the hands of those who claim to protect him.
The unjust nature of Wright’s death sparked massive backlash in the form of protests and riots leading to Mayor Jacob Frey of Minneapolis declaring a state of emergency.
With the curfew implemented and hundreds of protesters arrested for simply being outside too late, the unrest tapered off last week. However, videos have surfaced showing some rather shocking scenes unfold as Minneapolis and the surrounding areas turned into an outright militarized police state.
Even folks who were not involved in the protests have been rounded up under what many are saying appears to be martial law. Over the weekend, video surfaced of the heavy handed militarized tactics being used by both police and military who were called in to quell the unrest. It is nothing short of shocking.
According to the person who posted the video, several women, not affiliated with the protests, were attempting to gas up their vehicle — apparently after curfew — when heavily armed soldiers surrounded their car. The soldiers then ordered the women from the car with AR-15 rifles pointed at their heads.
As the completely harmless women, one of them in yoga pants, are ordered out of the vehicle, they are then forced to kneel on the ground with their hands on their heads. The scene was akin to a raid on the Taliban in Kabul, but happened in Minneapolis, and instead of the Taliban, it was innocent women in yoga pants.
Naturally, the footage has sparked criticism online with many comparing the scene to martial law.
“Whoever ordered this idiocy shld be unceremoniously & summarily removed from office. Arresting ppl at a MN gas station—pointing military grade assault rifles in their faces—is just outrageous. No elected official shld ever get away w this,” one Twitter user wrote.
“When there is widespread civil unrest, a state basically has 2 options: 1 – make a few concessions to public demands, or 2 – use tyrannical force to quell the unrest. And it’s quite obvious the direction our ruling class wants to go as public anger and despair continues to grow,” another tweet read.
Predictably, the debate online devolved into Twitter users blaming Donald Trump or Joe Biden — depending on which side of the political trough they choose to feed. Unfortunately both of them miss the point as this militarized police state is bipartisan. It was here long before Trump and began ramping up under George W. Bush during antiwar protests and came to a head under Obama during the Ferguson unrest.
There was one difference, however and some folks pointed out how the mainstream media didn’t even pick this story up at all now that Trump is out of office.
“This is the “return to normalcy” people were wanting. Because last year….whats happening in Minnesota, Portland, and Chicago right now would be on every news station and would be the top topics on Twitter. But now that the orange man is gone….we can talk about Cats again,” wrote one Twitter user.
Though this person is likely pro-Trump, his point holds merit. The national guard ordering women out of their car at gunpoint for pumping gas after curfew is most assuredly a national story — yet we couldn’t find a single mainstream media outlet who covered it.
When you watch the video below, remember as the mainstream media fills the airwaves with divisive propaganda, they are choosing not to show Americans the massive police state being constructed around them.
Rebel News was on location at the Whistle Stop Café in Mirror, Alberta this past Saturday, where owner Chris Scott has refused to shut down, despite new provincial lockdown measures. Chris has become, in the eyes of many, the unofficial leader of Alberta’s restaurant revolution, as many businesses are following his lead in refusing to heed Alberta Health Services’ directives.
Hundreds were on hand for Saturday’s event, with many waiting in line for hours for a chance to get their fill of Adamson Barbecue. A seemingly endless parade of cars and trucks honked in support of the event while passing by, though you might not have heard them over the live music that entertained the large crowd throughout the day. Numerous attendees commented on how “normal” all of this seemed, when contrasted with the isolation and starkness of a locked-down Canada.
AHS and the RCMP did arrive on location, issuing yet another closure order to the Whistle Stop Café. They also quickly cleared out a few guests who were dining inside the restaurant, but made no effort to put an end to the large outdoor event, which Skelly noted was an incredible departure from the abuse he endured at the hand of police and RCMP in Toronto.
Chris Scott insists that events like these will continue at the Whistle Stop until the government stops imposing crippling and overreaching restrictions on local businesses.
A massive Sunday protest at the site of GraceLife Church resulted in outside agitators pulling down the fence that currently walls off the property, before other protesters put it back up.
This weekend marked the first Sunday since the government of Alberta seized control of and forcibly occupied the property of GraceLife Church, west of Edmonton. Approximately 1,000 people protested the government overreach against the church on the road in front of the heavily fortified property, where dozens of armed RCMP and private security from Paladin remain staged behind three layers of fencing.
After protesters pulled down the fence on Sunday, RCMP riot teams were brought in and staged, but not deployed on the crowd. Earlier in the protest, hymns were sung and prayers were offered that government officials and the police would have a change of heart and return the property to GraceLife. As the fence came down, many protesters chanted to the others, “leave the fence alone.”
GraceLife was first issued a closure order by Alberta Health Services in January for failing to comply with the public health orders that limit church capacity to 15 per cent of fire code, force congregants into masks, prevent singing and the playing of instruments and mandate social distancing. The church says this is a violation of their fundamental freedom to practice their religion and has remained open, defying restrictions and holding services to a capacity crowd week after week. GraceLife drew international attention after Pastor James Coates turned himself in to provincial authorities for failing to comply with public health orders, and spent 35 days in custody at Edmonton’s maximum security Remand Centre.
At the time of the protest, most of the GraceLife congregation, along with Pastor Coates, were holding services at an undisclosed location off-site. They’ve gone underground, like Christian churches in China, to avoid the scrutiny of the state.
The congregation of GraceLife could have pulled the fence down at any time. They haven’t. For the congregation at GraceLife, it’s never been about the building or the property. They are the church, wherever they are, as long as they’re together in person.
What GraceLife wanted from the very beginning of their showdown with the government was to be able to gather together in person, unrestricted by the province and the health bureaucracy the Alberta government oversees. That’s why Pastor Coates was willing to go to jail. That’s also why Pastor Coates remained in jail, morally unable to comply with bail conditions that would force him to restrict his congregation to 15 per cent of fire code capacity.
The government can lock up their pastor. Another will take his place. The government can seize their church and land. They will meet elsewhere.
The mouthpieces of the scientific establishment have identified the latest global security threat: antiscience. So what does that mean, exactly? Whatever they want it to mean, of course! This week on The Corbett Report podcast, James explores the game of Science Says that the self-appointed experts are playing with the public and outlines how that game is about to get a whole lot darker.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Joining me today is Whitney Webb, here to discuss her recent exodus from the increasingly authoritarian country of Chile, the regime change that just took place in Tanzania, as well as the 4th Industrial Revolution.
How did we get from ’15 days to flatten the curve’ to a coerced-at-best-forced-at-worst vaccine passport? The premise of a vaccine ID to reopen misses the point that nearly 20 states are already in various stages of reopening.
Visions of a hunger games scenario are leaping from fiction to a possible future as society continues to be ‘reimagined’ through the vertical consolidation of power offered by Covid’s steamrolling of society.
Vaccine passports, or whatever we’re calling them this week, have only been rolled out in New York…so far. Already, however, a growing number of state lawmakers across America are moving to ban their use through various legislative efforts.
Finding political backbone and drawing lines in the sand, it appears that the vaccine passport is just a step too far for some political leaders.
Front of the pack is Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis who, when asked by reporters just a few short weeks ago if he’ll require proof of vaccination for his state’s residents to reenter society, had this to say:
“It’s a very, very bad idea…to require someone to show some type of proof of vaccination is completely unacceptable. It’s not something we are going to support here in any way.”
DeSantis backed up his words by signing an executive order on Friday. The order states that “vaccine passports, vaccine passes, or other standardized documentation for the purpose of certifying an individual’s Covid vaccination status to a third party” shall not be permitted.
The order also states that such actions are “necessary to protect the fundamental rights and privacies of Floridians and the free flow of commerce within the state.” Concerns such passports would “create two classes of citizens,” and “reduce individual freedom and will harm patient privacy.”
Other states and government representatives are following in a similar spirit.
“We have constitutional rights and health privacy laws for a reason,” said Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff. “They should not cease to exist in a time of crisis. These passports may start with Covid-19, but where will they end?” Benninghoff also stated concern about “using taxpayer money to generate a system that will now be, possibly, in the hands of mega-tech organizations who’ve already had problems with getting hacked and security issues.”
Several Wisconsin Republican legislators have a bill to prohibit government from requiring a vaccine passport, calling them discriminatory reports WISN 12. The bill banning any restrictions on people based on their vaccine status is still being circulated for co-sponsors but could be introduced in the Legislature later this month.
Ohio State Al Cutrona announced he plans to introduce legislation that would prohibit vaccine passports being mandated by local or state governments. What were the motivations for such legislation? “This bill essentially is going to reign in the government and prevent them from overreaching and overstepping like we’ve seen time and time again in the last year,” said Rep. Cutrona.
Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts said Wednesday that the state will not participate in any “vaccine passport program” reports the local Lincoln Star Journal.
“This concept violates two central tenets of the American system: freedom of movement and health care privacy,” the governor said. “Nebraska will take any necessary action to protect the private health information of our citizens and the freedoms we cherish.”
Representative Robert Spendlove sponsored House Bill 308 earlier this year which prohibits a governmental entity—including state agencies, local governments, and public schools—from requiring, either “directly or indirectly,” that an individual receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
The bill has since been signed into law by Governor Spencer Cox.
In short, Utah is opting out of any “vaccine passport” programs; no such document or database can be utilized as a condition of legal commerce or intrastate travel in the state, writes The Libertas Institute.
Mississippi, an early state along with Texas to allow its citizens to take their masks off, has signaled opposition to the vaccine passport idea.
“I don’t support vaccine passports. I don’t think it’s necessary and I don’t think it’s a good thing to do in America,” stated Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves when asked about the possible use of the passports in Mississippi.
The Arkansas Legislature is currently hearing a bill that would preempt any effort by the governments to require vaccine passports and would bar their use to dictate “entry, travel, education, employment or services.”
Introduced in the House on March 29th, Montana’s HB 702 seeks to bar any discrimination based on vaccination status while prohibiting immunity passports.
In addition, South Carolina Congresswoman Nancy Mace, Reps. Joe Wilson, Ralph Norman, Jeff Duncan, and William R. Timmons, IV recently joined state Gov. Henry McMaster in opposition to vaccine passports.
Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene went a step further invoking the Book of Revelations:
They are actually talking about people’s ability to buy and sell linked to the vaccine passport.
They might as well call it Biden’s Mark of the Beast.
Congresswoman Greene authored the The We Will Not Comply Act in an effort to ban the implementation of vaccine passports.
The NY Post Editorial Board released a piece titled ‘Vaccine passports’ just aren’t worth the trouble. They state their bottom line as “…another one of those technocratic ideas that at best comes too late and would be near-impossible to make work well in this nation, just as contact-tracing has essentially failed.”
Senior Policy Analyst Jay Stanley of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wrote that “We don’t oppose in principle the idea of requiring proof of vaccination in certain contexts.” However, he also stated of his organization that “…given the enormous difficulty of creating a digital passport system, and the compromises and failures that are likely to happen along the way, we are wary about the side effects and long-term consequences it could have.”
No matter what your thoughts are on the idea of a centralized system to track the vaccinated, a digital identification identifying individuals based on whether or not they will take an experimental product from a pharmaceutical company appears ripe for abuse.
The primary stakeholders in establishing a vaccine passport have a dismal track record when it comes to trustworthiness, fairness, freedoms and the law. Allowing such power to be centralized in the threefold hands of a Big Pharma-Big Tech-Big Government would very likely turn out to be a historically foolish misstep for America and humanity.
Even as Parisians continue to struggle under lockdown, members of the French elite, potentially including government ministers, have been caught attending rulebreaking secret restaurants in the French capital.
French TV channel M6 aired secretly recorded footage of clandestine dinners taking place at an “underground restaurant located in a beautiful part” of Paris.
The clip shows guests at the restaurant without masks openly kissing each other and violating social distancing rules. There also appears to be no restrictions on the number of guests allowed.
The cost of the dinners – as much as €490 euros per person, underscores the fact that the private club caters exclusively for wealthy visitors.
According to an anonymous organizer of such events, later revealed to be Pierre-Jean Chalencon, the owner of the Palais Vivienne, they are occurring two or three times a week and are attended by government ministers.
Chalencon subsequently claimed that he was joking when he admitted to the infractions.
Last night, Paris’ chief prosecutor Remy Heitz launched an investigation into the matter, asserting that organizers and participants will be prosecuted.
“If ministers or deputies have broken the rules, they must pay fines and be penalized like any other citizen,” said junior minister Marlene Schiappa.
This is just the latest example of members of government and other insiders in major western countries avoiding the very same lockdown policies they impose on other people.
Last month, John Kerry was caught removing his face mask as soon as he boarded a flight in Boston.
Joe Biden also violated his own executive order on the day it was signed when his family took part in a photo-op on federal property after removing their masks.
California Governor Gavin Newsom’s rampant hypocrisy was exposed when he was caught on camera unmasked eating indoors at a Michelin star restaurant with a group of 12 people while telling Californians they could only celebrate Thanksgiving outside.
When Nancy Pelosi visited a hair salon in San Francisco, breaking rules that only allow service outdoors, she also removed her mask.
Meanwhile, in the UK, one of the main architects of the country’s lockdown policy, Professor Neil Ferguson, violated the law to visit his married mistress in London.
You’ll no doubt be aware of it by now. The Prime Minister wants every man woman and child to to take two covid-19 tests a week. Read my previous article if this is the first you’ve heard of it.
Johnson will address the nation from Downing Street’s new media room at 5 pm. He’ll be flanked by two of the usual SAGE goons. The PM will try and sell his national mass testing plan to a totally fed-up public. It has previously been dubbed the “moonshot.”
It is insane. It is unprecedented and it is 100 per cent tyrannical. Unprecedented because no government in history has asked its healthy citizens to subject themselves to routine testing for a virus. Why would a healthy person take a test? It’s totally illogical. Tyrannical because the government is promising that compliance is the way to hasten the removal of restrictions.
Is there anyone who still believes that this is about a virus? More than half the population has received a vaccine. The so-called vulnerable have all had two doses. Hospitals are quiet (they were never busy), cases numbers are insignificant and there are few deaths.
Last week, UK Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty said that the country cannot lock down again and that we’ll have to learn to live with Covid just as we live with the flu. Whatever covid is or was, it is on the way out. The vast majority of us either never had it, or if we did, we didn’t even know as the symptoms were so mild.
I strongly suspect that covid is the flu rebranded. I say suspect, because in the end, what the hell do I know? I do know though, that they told us that the flu disappeared. Again, does anyone believe that? I still chuckle when I think that people bought that horseshit.
So whatever it is or was, it’s nearly done. Yet the government is sending mass testing kits to every home in the country. The government wants us to carry digital covid certificates to get into the pub or the cinema.
I don’t have to tell you what’s really going on or why this is really happening. You know. I’ll tell you what I am going to do when covid tests are dropped through my letterbox.
I’m going to stick them in my dog’s poo. I’m going to piss on them. I’m going to push them around the neighbour’s cat litter tray. I’m going to neatly wrap them and post them to Boris Johnson, 10 Downing Street, SW1A 2AA.
If you feel as strongly as I do, consider doing the same. I choose peaceful civil disobedience over tyranny. I will never take their dangerous experimental drugs and I will not be coerced into testing myself twice a week for a mythical disease.
The TSA – whose job is supposedly “fighting terrorism” – is, without doubt, one of America’s most corrupt and incompetent agencies. However, last year, they apparently became so unsatisfied with the mere ability to strip search babies, remove colostomy bags, beat up blind cancer patients, and fondle your genitalia, that they announced a more invasive physical pat-downs. The pat-downs, which TSA warned would probably prompt assault complaints with the police department because of their invasive nature, have been implemented.
On top of aggressive pat downs and indiscriminate molestation of the young, old, and even triple amputees, the TSA can and will steal your money if they find it in your bag. A new class action lawsuit filed by the Institute for Justice, exposes an egregious practice of agents taking money — specifically, lots of cash — from innocent people, and keeping it. And they are doing it “legally.”
The class action lawsuit seeks to put an end to this legal theft and it will now move forward against both the TSA and DEA.
“TSA and DEA routinely violate Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights at airports across the country by detaining them for doing something completely legal: flying with cash,” said IJ Senior Attorney Dan Alban. “Seizing and forfeiting someone’s savings should not be done lightly, yet we’ve documented how easy it is for law enforcement to take money at airports without any evidence of a crime. Now, thanks to our class action lawsuit, we are going to uncover the truth behind how and why the government is targeting innocent flyers, and ultimately put an end to this predatory practice.”
Several of the victims named in the lawsuit had tens of thousands of dollars stolen from them and were never even accused of a crime, much less convicted of one. Terry Rolin and his daughter Rebecca Brown were flying from Pittsburgh to Boston with Terry’s life savings in order to open a bank account to help care for her father. When TSA found the cash in their luggage, it was stolen.
According to the IJ, additional named plaintiffs joined the suit in July 2020. DEA seized $43,000 from Stacy Jones at the Wilmington, North Carolina, airport in May 2020 as she was flying home to Tampa. The agency returned her money after she joined the lawsuit and nine months after it was seized. Once again, criminal charges were never filed.
“TSA’s and DEA’s unconstitutional conduct across the country suggests that the agencies are more interested in seizing cash than securing safety,” said IJ Attorney Jaba Tsitsuashvili. “And these seizures subject people to a confusing bureaucratic process, without an attorney provided, where a single misstep could mean losing their life savings forever. Even those who succeed in getting their money returned are deprived of it for months or years, often upending their lives. No one should lose their money without a criminal conviction.”
We agree.
Sadly, the TSA, who has never stopped a terror attack and is unable to stop 95 percent of the tests against its tactics, gropes and molests children and adults alike — who unquestioningly accept it.
As TFTP has previously reported, when the TSA isn’t stealing from the elderly, they are molesting them — even 84-year-old survivors of the holocaust.
Eva Mozes Kor exposed her abuse by TSA in a Tweet, explaining how she was forced to undergo a “very demeaning body search” just to board a plane. In her Tweet, she drew a parallel with the TSA and Auschwitz.
Kor was traveling back home after giving a lecture on the horrors of Auschwitz when she said she was able to survive being in a concentration camp but could barely survive the abuse she suffered at the hands of TSA.
“Another very demeaning body search by the TSA – there has to be some way that at age 84 I can get some clearance by the POWERS of Government from this procedure. As I lecture about surviving Auschwitz I barely survive the TSA body search I detest it. That ruined my experience,” wrote the 84-year-old.
Hopefully, this lawsuit exposes the problem with TSA and Americans start paying attention before TSA is deployed to malls and grocery stores, stealing our money while checking our vaccine passports.
With reports that President Joe Biden’s administration is planning for imposing a vaccine passport mandate in America, expect to see in the media a deluge of vaccine passport propaganda. What will that propaganda look like? A template illustrating several elements you can expect to see in the propaganda push was provided several weeks ago in a CNN interview.
In the first week of March, host Fareed Zakaria and his guest Arthur Caplan provided at CNN a textbook example of how to present vaccine passport propaganda to the American people. Let’s look at some of the major elements of the propaganda template as demonstrated by Zakaria and Caplan.
1) Include some short expression that the idea of vaccine passports can be troubling, but make sure to only bring this up superficially. This is accomplished in the CNN segment by starting with a clip from a short scene from the movie Casablanca. In the clip, a policeman asks to see a man’s “papers,” the man says he does not have them, and the policeman responds, “in that case we’ll have to ask you to come along.” Not shown is the remainder of the scene in which the accosted man, after presenting apparently expired papers, attempts to flee only to be gunned down. Not showing the full scene demonstrates the care demanded in the propaganda to not allow any depiction of potential dire consequences from imposing vaccine passports.
2) Frame the imposing of a vaccine passport mandate as something that is both inevitable and threatens only minimal, if any, harm. Zakaria accomplishes this task with the first sentence he utters to begin the media segment. Zakaria states: “From Casablanca to today, a demand to produce personal documents can be uncomfortable, but, post-pandemic, it’s something we’ll all likely have to get more and more comfortable with.” Masterfully, Zakaria, in addition to minimizing the problems with passports as just causing discomfort, asserts that even that discomfort with time will disappear, suggesting objecting to vaccine passports is just an irrational or silly reaction.
3) Bring on a guest who, despite his description making him sound like someone who would be looking out for the interests of people concerned about vaccine passports, pretty much says that vaccine passports are the best thing since sliced bread. In the CNN interview the guest performing this role is Arthur Caplan, who Zakaria introduces as a “medical ethicist” and “professor at NYU.” A medical ethicist will surely provide some warning about dangers from vaccine passports, right? Yes, in many cases. But, Caplan is not that sort of medical ethicists. He is the one picked to be interviewed in a media segment designed to promote acceptance of vaccine passports.
4) Reiterate that vaccine passports are inevitable, and that people should support them. Zakaria hits the nail on the head with this, presenting this first question to his guest: “So explain why you think, basically, that this is the future and we should be comfortable with it.”
5) Declare that vaccine passports must be imposed on the American people because of coronavirus. Caplan accomplishes this task in his first words in the media segment. He states: “Well, I’m sure that the future holds vaccine passports for us, partly to protect against the spread of Covid.” Of course, as coronavirus has turned out not to be a major danger to most people, imposing a vaccine passport mandate to counter it makes no more sense than doing it to counter any other of many diseases. But, this is not a topic to be brought up when selling people on vaccine passports. Fearmongering, no matter how ridiculously unjustified, is the name of the game. This is the fraudulent message people are encouraged to act on without much critical thought: Coronavirus is gonna kill us all unless we take the shots and show our papers!
6) Say that mandating vaccine passports is really no big deal because of some other supposedly very similar restriction to which some people are already subjected. Caplan states: “And, you know, it’s not a new idea, we have it for yellow fever; there are about more than a dozen countries that say you can’t come in if you haven’t been vaccinated against yellow fever, and many others require you to show proof of vaccination if you transit through those countries.” Are the yellow fever-related requirements justified? Caplan does not say more than that, because these somewhat similar restrictions exist someplace, the mandating of vaccine passports in America is fine. That’s medical ethicist reasoning? Anyway, the yellow fever stuff, because most Americans have no experience with or knowledge of it, is a fine example for the propaganda. Few watchers of the segment will have any basis for questioning the current practice that is used to justify the new desired mandate. One big difference, though, jumps out on further consideration. Caplan explains that the yellow fever requirements apply for just coming to several countries. In contrast, Zakaria early in the interview says the vaccine passports that will, he claims, inevitably be imposed on Americans will be required for people “to get on an airplane, to go to a concert, or to go back to work.” The vaccine passport mandate is, thus, much more troublesome for most Americans than yellow-fever-related requirements for entry into a few countries that most Americans never visit. But, the point is to quickly present the example as if it provides conclusive support no matter how far that representation is from the truth.
7) Dismiss as insignificant people’s concerns about being required, in order to go about their daily activities, to present a vaccine passport and to take a vaccine, or, really, an experimental coronavirus vaccine that is not even a vaccine under the normal meaning of the term. Assert instead that the only danger to freedom could be something theoretical that could be additionally required in the future. Here is how Zakaria puts it in a question to Caplan: “What about the concerns that many people have about privacy, about the privacy of their health data, that, you know, is there a slippery slope here — ‘OK, I’m comfortable telling you whether or not I have Covid, but does that mean it becomes OK to ask about other things?’” Of course, many people are justifiably wary of being pressured to take the shots and then having their mandated vaccine passport used to track them as they go about their daily activities. That is why this media segment and others like it are being presented, after all.
8) Dismiss any concern that vaccine passports can in fact harm freedom. Instead, describe people as benefiting from and gaining freedom by their being mandated to take experimental coronavirus vaccines and present vaccination passports in order to go about their daily activities. Oh yeah, and keep quiet about all the mass surveillance facilitated by a vaccine passport program, the vaccinations-based caste system resulting from the mandate that will make people who do not take the shots suffer, and how the vaccine passport program can be expanded to advance many additional types of control over people. Here is how Caplan puts it: “With a Covid certification, you’re going to gain freedom, you’re going to gain mobility, and I’m going to suggest that you’re probably going to be able to get certain jobs.” Talk about turning things on their head. The mandate really means that people who do not comply will be barred from the mobility they already have and fired from their jobs. Freedom is supported by rejecting the mandate, not by supporting it.
9) Insist that the vaccine passport mandate is fine because it will be applied equally to all people. This is something Zakaria and Caplan spend a long time talking about in the CNN segment. Come on guys, something bad does not become good because it is applied to the maximum number of people, irrespective of their race, sex, or whatever. We are dealing with a mandate here, not giving everyone a serving of his favorite dessert.
10) Declare that a vaccine passport mandate helps encourage people to take the shots. (Unlike the other nine elements of the vaccine passport mandate propaganda template, this one is likely true. Threats can yield compliance. Still, the threats could deter some people from taking the experimental coronavirus vaccine shots. It sure makes you wonder about shots’ supposed safety when an extreme, and unprecedented, act of force is employed to ensure people take the shots.) States Caplan in the interview: “It also gives you an incentive to overcome vaccine hesitancy. Some people are not sure still whether they want to do the vaccine, but if you promise them more mobility, more ability to get a job, more ability to get travel, that’s a very powerful incentive to actually achieve fuller vaccination.” What Caplan is really talking about is coercion. He is saying that people who would otherwise refuse taking the shots will be forced to do so by the vaccine passport mandate severely restricting their activities and even depriving them of the ability to earn an income so long as they do not give in to the demand they take the shots. All this authoritarianism is dressed up in deceptive language. “Vaccine hesitancy” is substituted for “vaccine refusal” to disguise that the vaccine passport mandate is about stopping people from exercising free choice. “Incentive” is substituted for “coercive technique.”
Watch Zakaria and Caplan’s interview here:
Hopefully, many people will see through the deception and be able to prevent the implementation of the vaccine passport mandate Zakaria, Caplan, and others are promoting in the media.
Pastor James Coates Returns to GraceLife in Edmonton, Canada — RCMP Try to Disrupt Services
This past Sunday marked the return of Pastor James Coates to his congregation at GraceLife Church after spending 35 days in provincial custody for breaking public health orders that limited the size of worship services.
The church, just west of Edmonton, has become a flashpoint in the fight to protect religious freedom from government overreach and infringement during the coronavirus pandemic. Coates has openly defied provincial public health orders, preaching to capacity crowds where mask laws and social distancing are not enforced. His actions, which he described as obedient to God, prompted police and Alberta Health Services inspectors to surveil the church, issue a $1,200 ticket to Coates, and then arrest and charge the pastor with an undertaking requiring him to follow the public health orders on February 7. Ultimately, Coates turned himself in on February 16 for breaking the undertaking, after holding non-compliant services again on February 14.
Coates was released from custody on March 22 and returned to his church this Sunday, although not to preach. He offered opening and closing prayers while Associate Pastor Jake Spenst led the sermon to a crowd that reached fire code capacity of 619.
As services began, two local RCMP officers and an Alberta Health Services inspector demanded entry to the church, something church elders argued would violate section 176(2) of the Criminal Code, which prohibits interrupting a religious services. A tense exchange between the two sides lasted approximately 20 minutes before police and inspectors left to monitor the service from off-site, after being denied access to the church.
Lawsuit Filed in France — Against the State, Prime Minister & Minister of Health — Challenging the Emergency Health Law
On March 8, 2021, Me de Araujo-Recchia filed an interim summons before the president of the Paris judicial court against the health emergency law. This complaint was filed at the request of three associations and 1360 individuals against the State, Prime Minister Jean Castex and Minister of Health Olivier Véran. We reproduce the following elements for our readers. In conclusion, she states that:
For all of the reasons explained, we affirm that the Prime Minister and the Minister responsible for health have therefore clearly carried out the forced execution of administrative decisions in irregular conditions, thus clearly undermining freedom of the individual applicants.
In addition, given that the qualification of health disaster has absolutely not been demonstrated or justified by the executive power, common law applies.
These measures prohibiting leaving the home without health justification qualify in reality as house arrest measures, to use the terms commonly applicable in criminal law, because it is not something else.
These measures prohibiting leaving the home / house arrest have been taken against the entire population, in a general, arbitrary and indiscriminate manner, whereas the Constitution and international treaties require that they be taken into account the actions of individuals and recourse to the judicial judge.
Indeed, no administrative authority can decide to deprive the entire population of individual liberty on the sole basis of:
computerized data, corresponding to a number of unreliable positive RT-PCR tests performed by laboratories, which cannot diagnose infection or disease.
a doubtful and imprecise number of deaths since it is impossible today to know the exact number of people who died from the disease Covid-19 and not “with the Covid-19” (according to the results of tests once again unreliable).
The constitutional bloc and the conventional bloc have never given such power to administrative authorities.
These assaults clearly affected the individual liberty of the applicants and thereby their dignity and the physical, mental and moral integrity of each individual.
We therefore ask for the immediate cessation of these measures which violate individual liberty and we ask for reparation.
Rutgers U announces students are required to receive vaccine, as senators call “anti-vaxxers” domestic terrorists. Legislators call for banning ‘conspiracy theorists’ from government.
The push for vaccine apartheid and censorship of critical thought is accelerating, and the state is creating a sub-human class of “untermensch” who are dangerous. This is happening rapidly.
Christian from the Ice Age Farmer broadcast stresses how urgent the situation is in this bitchute exclusive.
“People do not expect to find chastity in a whorehouse. Why, then, do they expect to find honesty and humanity in government, a congeries of institutions whose modus operandi consists of lying, cheating, stealing, and if need be, murdering those who resist?” ~ H. L. Mencken
Political power, let’s call that government, can only be achieved if those few holding that power convince the people at large, let’s call them subjects, to voluntarily consent to be ruled. By creating elections, the government in essence claims power by consent, as voting in this flawed and corrupt system means accepting that system and accepting the outcome. That acceptance, while implied, is meant to serve as the law of the land, and why would it not, given that the people line up by the millions to choose their own masters? If the people can be fooled into believing that such a farce is the basis of their liberty, then they can be managed and controlled quite easily.
As any with even a modicum of intelligence left can see, this entire setup is based on lies, propaganda, and deceit, but the people continue to participate in this ludicrous process throughout their entire lives; all the time expecting a better result. This is true of those that vote and many that do not. Most simply accept the system due to indoctrination and a lifetime of brainwashing. This of course, is the definition of insanity, and so long as the masses remain in this state of confusion and compliance, public insanity will be the driving force of the government’s success in acquiring and holding power over them.
The preposterous nature of the lack of understanding of freedom by the masses is our biggest problem. This ignorance of liberty has been evident since the so-called “Founders” created this centrally controlled nation-state and their own set of rules for the people to live by at the very secret Constitutional Convention. This is astounding. There has been a steady decline in what partial freedom did exist in the past, but jumping forward to today, all that can be said is that little if any freedom now exists. The decimation of freedom of the individual has been accomplished incrementally, but the continuous assault against the natural rights of Americans has been unrelenting in its march toward the totalitarianism that now consumes this country. This was all planned long ago.
Now we face a total crushing of all liberty at the hands of the state, and few have been able to grasp the absolute urgency of this situation, as most are still of the belief that all will be fine, and we soon will return to the normal amount of tyranny that has escalated for decades on end without resistance. For all those that take this uninformed and absurd position, maybe you should consider just some of the things happening right before your eyes, instead of “hoping” that all will magically be remedied.
In one form or another, we have been locked down for over a year. That has changed somewhat in some areas, but is still in effect for many in one form or another. Quarantines, business closings, and home imprisonment were ordered, and will be ordered again. Mask wearing is still mandated in many areas across many states, but people are still wearing them even if not ordered to do so, so mass compliance and cowardice is evident. Travel outside this country has been nearly shut down, and mandated testing by bogus tests and mask mandates are required, and even domestic travel has become a nightmare. Governments in Europe and the U.S. are aggressively seeking legislation for immunity passports, or “papers,” and Europe is very close to approving ‘vaccination’ proof or ‘demanding immunity’ proof now. It is claimed that this will expand freedom, when just the opposite is the case, as this is just more propaganda. Mass surveillance is expanding, as is censorship of everyone not going along with the state’s dishonest narrative, which is an obvious sign that the government and its partners are attempting to eliminate all truth and free speech. Multiple mass shootings have been taking place, and these seem likely to be staged false flag events, or at least possibly allowed by the enforcement agencies and the FBI. Evidence has already surfaced that they had advance knowledge about the alleged shooter in Boulder. This will be used to set up gun control and gun confiscation in the near future, all under the guise of safety. The telegraphing of continued tyranny is apparent as well, as now the new falsely claimed threat will be mutant variants of a virus that does not exist. These claims are meant to prepare the sheep for more extreme tyranny at the hands of the state. More incidences of police violence against those not willing to comply with mask mandates are occurring, and police brutality is once again increasing. Even Dr. Judy Mikovits was manhandled and injured by airport security in communist California, this even though she had on a special mask given to her by her doctor. Squatters and people unwilling to pay their rent are being protected by the state at the expense of homeowners, as the government in many instances has disallowed eviction due to not paying rent or mortgage payments. This is just a short list.
The toxic and life-changing concoction falsely called a ‘vaccination,’ is nothing less than a way to poison society, alter the genetic makeup of Americans, and is most certainly causing infertility, sickness, anaphylactic shock, body and mind crippling, and in many cases deaths of individuals taking this shot. More pressure is being applied to get a high percentage of the population injected, and as time goes by, this toxic poison will be required in order to travel and move about, work, enter stores and businesses, to gain access to finances, food, stimulus checks, and many other daily vital functions. In other words, the push to force Americans to get injected with this so-called Covid experiment are already underway, and are expanding every day.
In the midst of all this totalitarian madness, many more agendas are being pursued by the controlling and governing classes, including possible war, monetary restructuring and eliminating cash, gun control, bogus climate change policies that rely on economic destruction and control, government land grabs, the mass transfer of private property from citizens to government due to government mandates causing bankruptcy, the rollout of ‘smart’ technology that is very detrimental to society, and much more.
The final agendas will include mass extermination of much of the population, transformation of the human mind and body through transhuman alteration, and technocratic control of the planet by the most evil among us.
The people can stop this by practicing en masse total disobedience and dissent at every level possible. Numbers are important, and as more awaken, as is beginning to happen, more dissent should be forthcoming; so much so that with a small percentage of Americans, this debacle we face can be turned around, and this government can be made impotent. Without a mass effort, we will all come to know what slavery and servitude really means, and all will be targeted, whether black, white, Democrat, Republican, left, right, men, women, gay, straight, and all those others of every culture and ethnicity. None will be spared, so acting and working together to regain freedom is imperative!
Unity and cooperation can win the day, while fighting amongst ourselves will only guarantee tyranny and misery. We must work together in any way possible to defeat this evil enemy called the state, and if we do not, oppression, violence, and killing will be a certainty in our future. This can be done without violence, but if we wait too long, fighting will become necessary; it will be brutal and ugly, but this governing system must be dismantled and its power abolished, as it can never be reformed.
“No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche
I was recently on a work assignment in Florida, covering Canadian vaccine refugees fleeing Trudeau’s procurement failure and heading stateside for a poke in the arm. Upon returning, I was threatened with a $750,000 fine and six months in jail if I did not submit to an illegal throat inspection and subsequently present myself to a local gulag.
Not only does this program trample over the fundamental rights and freedoms of thousands of Canadians every week — it is causing irreparable financial, emotional, and in some cases, physical harm to countless vulnerable citizens.
Specifically, our lawsuit argues that this government program is a flagrant and ongoing violation of sections 7, 8, and 9 of the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms (along with a few other laws and freedoms).
Make no mistake, this lawsuit and the program itself are leaving a black eye on the government. The people who Trudeau is interning as political scapegoats — leaving them mobbing hotel employees for food — are the very same people who would typically be voting Liberal. Canadians who are members of ethnic minorities and have family members abroad — that is Trudeau’s bread and butter. This program is such a stain on Trudeau that the government issued a state-sanctioned comedy sketch on the CBC’sThis Hour Has 22 Minutes, mocking my coverage of the inner workings of these facilities.
Of course, the state comedians laughed at my disgust with the cold toaster waffles, but neglected to mention the women who have allegedly been assaulted and molested in Trudeau’s “isolation facilities.” They forgot to mention the families who can’t cover rent after Trudeau extorted $2,000 from them as a political punishment for going to see their dying relatives abroad.
Rebel News and I are suing Trudeau because it is the right thing to do. It is not just to get justice for ourselves — we are applying to a federal judge to strike down this illegal and shameful program nationwide. If you want to see that happen, please consider helping us crowdfund our legal bills. It is the only way we can keep going.
Groups representing teachers, counselors and employees say the Los Angeles Unified School District’s vaccine mandate violates federal law and basic human rights.
Employees of the second-largest school district in the U.S. filed suit last week to prevent the district from mandating COVID-19 vaccines as a condition of employment.
In a press release, HFDF said LAUSD’s vaccine mandate violates federal law and basic human rights by requiring employees to take an experimental vaccine in order to remain employed.
All COVID vaccines available in the U.S. — Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — are approved under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). By the FDA’s own definition, that makes the vaccines “experimental” until or unless the FDA licenses them.
School employees alleged in their complaint that the statute granting the FDA power to authorize a medical product for emergency use, 21 U.S.C. § Section 360bbb-3, requires that the person being administered the unapproved product be advised of the benefits and risks, and of his or her right to refuse the product.
In their lawsuit, employees allege that Section 360bbb-3 recognizes the “well-settled doctrine” that medical experiments, or “clinical research,” may not be performed on human subjects without the express, informed consent of the individual receiving treatment.
According to HFDF, the fundamental right to avoid imposed human experimentation has its roots in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, which was later ratified by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, further codified in the United States Code of Federal Regulations and adopted by the California Legislature. It says that “no person subject to this state’s jurisdiction may be forced to undergo the administration of experimental medicine without that person’s informed consent.”
Since adoption of the Nuremberg Code, free nations have recognized that forced medical experimentation of any kind is both inhumane and unethical. “There is no “pandemic exception” to the law or the Constitution,” plaintiffs stated in their complaint.
“This is a very important case for educators all across America and is likely to set a precedent for all of us,” said Michael Kane, New York City teacher and founder of NY Teachers for Choice.
“Sometimes all you need is someone to stand up and say ‘No’ to remind everyone that we are completely within our rights to resist government overreach. And that is what this is — government overreach.”
Kane said the LAUSD teacher’s union “definitely plays a role in all of this” and that LA teachers need to lobby their union and threaten to pull their money from supporting the union if it doesn’t support their right to choice. “Rank-and-file union members must hold their union leadership accountable and force them to represent those who are pro-choice for all medical procedures,” Kane said.
The complaint states that employees of LAUSD last month began to receive communications from Superintendent Austin Beutner and other representatives of LAUSD instructing them to make appointments to get vaccinated.
None of the communications to employees included the information from the fact sheet required by the FDA to be given to vaccine recipients under EAU.
On March 4, guidance from LAUSD human resources was given to employees that stated: “The Moderna vaccine is currently being administered by Los Angeles Unified nurses and other licensed healthcare professionals to Los Angeles Unified employees. You will schedule your appointment […]. You will provide proof of vaccination via the DailyPass for time reporting purposes.”
As The Defender reported March 10, Daily Pass is a COVID tracking system developed by Microsoft that will scan employees and students using a barcode before they can enter school each day. LAUSD is the first school district to announce that it will require every student and employee to get the Daily Pass, which school officials said will coordinate health checks, COVID tests and vaccinations. Data collected will be reported to public health authorities and other LAUSD healthcare collaborators.
According to the employees’ lawsuit, the process for developing a vaccine normally takes place over a period of years with many different stages of testing, as it may take years for the side effects of a new vaccine to manifest themselves. “No one knows the short, medium or long-term effects of this medical intervention over 1, 5, 10 or 50 years,” HFDF said.
By mandating experimental COVID vaccines, LAUSD is “forcing employees to choose between providing for their families and being the victim of human experimentation,” said HFDF. “Forced vaccination is not only unethical, it violates the tenets fundamental to a free society and must stop.”
North Carolina — “Should a child that believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy be making life-altering decisions?” asked New Hanover County Chief District Court Judge Jay Corpening. This is a question which has come up repeatedly in the state of North Carolina as dozens of children as young a six are being processed into the criminal justice system. The latest case involves a 6-year-old boy who was arrested and forced to go to court because he picked a flower while waiting for the bus.
Attorney Julie Boyer’s child client was on trial for injury to real property after he stopped to pick a flower from a yard near his bus stop, according to The Herald-Sun. Illustrating the ridiculous nature of sending a child to court for picking a flower is the fact that he had no idea what was going on.
Boyer said she had to give the boy some crayons and a coloring book during the proceedings because he did not have the mental capacity to understand what was happening to him.
“I asked him to color a picture,” she said, “so he did.”
This is a serious problem and speaks to the archaic nature of the law in the state of North Carolina. Currently, the state’s juvenile system has the lowest minimum age in the world to enter the court system — which is six.
Advocates for children have been trying unsuccessfully for years to change the law but to no avail. This is worrisome as statistics show the earlier a child is brought into the system, the chances that the remain in that system increase drastically.
“A 6-year-old … we’re talking about someone that’s in kindergarten, first grade. They don’t understand the process, the don’t understand what’s going on, they probably don’t even know their address,” Lyana Hunter, a New Hanover County public defender’s office employee told WECTNews. “The earlier that you introduce a child to the criminal justice system, the higher the chances are that they will remain in the criminal justice system.”
Hunter explained that representing children under 9 is a common practice, illustrating how widespread the problem is.
“I think the youngest I actually had in a trial… they were eight. Some were.. seven, eight, maybe a 9-year-old. Literally their feet… they’re just swinging from the chairs because they couldn’t reach the floor,” said Hunter.
Luckily for the flower-picking kindergartner, the judge dismissed the case after the boy’s mother “couldn’t make the intake meeting,” according to The Herald-Sun.Unfortunately, even though the case was thrown out, the process of being brought into the criminal justice system could change the boy’s life forever.“He gets served with papers. His mom gets served with papers,” Boyer explained. “It was just appalling.”Sending a little boy to court for picking a flower is most certainly appalling but the fact that this is not an isolated incident should shock the conscience.
“A 6-year-old cannot comprehend what is taking place in court, but probably will never forget being labeled a delinquent,” Satana Deberry, district attorney for Durham County wrote in an email.
Equally as egregious as arresting and trying a 6-year-old little boy for picking a flower is that this not only happens often but it happens mostly to children of color. According to a report from the Winston-Salem Journal:
From 2015 through 2018 nearly 7,300 complaints were filed against children age 6 to 11 years old, according to numbers from the state Juvenile Justice section.
Of those complaints, 47% were against Black children, 40% were against white children and 7% against Hispanic or Latino children.
In general, 22% of the state’s population is Black, 70% is white and 10% is Hispanic.
Roughly 82% percent of the complaints were against boys.
“It is a suspected statistic,” said Yakob Lemma, 17, an Enloe High senior and co-founder of the Wake County Black Student Coalition. “This is just proof that we have been criminalized since we’re young, since we are little kids, and we have to grow up all our lives like that, with being criminalized and being actively targeted.”
Childhood mistakes should never be criminalized but in case after case, situations like this unfold in other states as well. Earlier this month, TFTP reported on the state of Wisconsin in which children are being fined hundreds of dollars for missing online classes. If they cannot afford the fines, these children have to work them off in community service.
The stage is now being set for the next great war on the so-called “Grand Chessboard.”
As anyone who has been paying attention to global geopolitics in recent years will know by now, the US Empire (the US, the UK, Israel, the Five Eyes allies, NATO and all their regional allies and vassals) are preparing to square off against China and the Axis of Evil (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and any state that provides any resistance to the US Empire) for global control in the 21st century.
And, as readers of this column will be uniquely prepared to understand, this entire conflict is part of a 3D chess game that is taking place over and above the regular, 2D nation-state chessboard that we are being asked to fixate on.
However, there is a 2D chess game going on and it is part of the Problem-Reaction-Solution that the 3D chess players are using to bring about their agenda. So today let’s examine the latest moves on the grand chessboard and see what they reveal about the globalists’ plans for total control.
Problem: The Rise of China
All hail Chinese democracy!
Remember five years ago when everyone was talking about the 十三五? Well, guess what? It’s already time for the 十四五! (My, how the half-decades fly by!)
Yes, as you no doubt know by now the Chinese Communist Party just wrapped up the fourth session of the 13th National People’s Congress at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. And, as you also know, dear informed reader, that means that the ChiComs have just laid out their next five-year plan. (Do you have your copy yet?)
There are at least four categories of hot take on what the latest five-year plan entails.
There are the hot takes from the partisan lying mockingbird repeaters in the controlled establishment press who are trying to scry the tealeaves for weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the New Red Menace™. Observe, for example, Foreign Policy‘s gloating that the plan shows Beijing’s “lack of ambition” or The Economist‘s finger-wagging about China’s lackluster carbon reduction efforts or the Council on Foreign Relations’ warning of Beijing’s “growing urgency to protect China from external vulnerabilities through attaining self-reliance in science and technology.”
There are the hot takes from the actual state-controlled Chinese media. See Xinhuanet‘s calm and measured observation that the passage of the plan “demonstrates the unity of the leadership of the Party, the position of the people as masters of the country, and law-based governance” for a typical example.
There are the hot takes from various industry publications that focus on what the plan means for those seeking to corner the domestic Chinese market for their goods or what China’s moves will mean for their sector. Thus, PitchBook concentrates on China’s efforts to woo foreign capital by loosening restrictions in certain industries, Nature concentrates on China’s decision to concentrate on creating a “strategic research force for the nation,” and Power Technology does a deep dive on the implications of the new five-year plan for the energy sector.
And then there are the quasi-independent media sources that—in seeking to combat the predominant establishment narrative—serve mostly as a mouthpiece for ChiCom talking points. Take Pepe Escobar, for example, whose latest piece on The Shape Of Things To Come In China starts out by reporting on the details of the five-year plan and end up in a paean to Chinese Communist system of technocratic tyranny, claiming that “public opinion confidence in the Beijing leadership remains solid” and that the ChiComs system “is like a sophisticated mix of internationalist Marxism with Confucianism (privileging harmony, abhorring conflict): the framework for ‘community with a shared future for mankind.'”
What all of these perspectives ultimately serve to do is to reinforce the central narrative of the New Cold War: that the rise of China is a threat to the Western establishment. This narrative reinforces the impression that the 2D chess game is really the game for all the marbles (to mix gaming metaphors) and it throws the general public into a fear state where they are more apt to call for action to combat this vile threat than to seek to understand the nature and origins of this threat.
That’s convenient for the 3D chess players, because it plays right into the next stage of their controlled dialectic, namely . . .
Reaction: The Rise of the Quad
Scared yet, China?
As Newton taught us, for every action there is an equal-and-opposite reaction. And so it is that, once we are conditioned to believe in the rise of the New Red Menace™, we are simultaneously prepared to expect a reaction from the West.
Well, fret not, dear scared citizen, your leaders are indeed taking action. They’re forming The Quad!
No, “the Quad” is not some new Marvel Comic superhero team; it’s the snappy name for the US/Japan/Australia/India alliance that is seeking to keep that rising Chinese menace in check. The Quad—formally known as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue—was first proposed by then-Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2007, but was activated during the Trump Administration during Pompeo’s Indo-Pacific security push.
Like everything else of importance to the 3D chess players, the transition from the Trump-era Quad to the Biden-era Quad has been seamless. Trump Secretary of State Mike “lie, cheat, steal” Pompeo’s call in October of last year for the Quad to become an “Asian NATO” became Biden’s call for a Quad leaders summit this month as if nothing at all had happened in the intervening months.
The fact that Team Coke and Team Pepsi are working toward the same foreign policy goals are baffling to those stuck looking at the 2D chess board, but from the 3D perspective, this continuity of agenda is telling. It demonstrates that the China bogeyman narrative is important to those who are steering this agenda. Whatever flavour of cola is in power, it is important for the public to understand that China is The Enemy and must be confronted by The Good Guys. Hence, the Quad marches on.
As I’ve demonstrated at length before, it’s not that the ChiComs and their “axis of evil” friends are actually the misunderstood good guys in all of this. It’s that the entire ChiCom threat has been carefully and deliberately constructed by wealth transfers, banking agreements, R&D investments, military technology “leaks” and offshoring of manufacturing over the course of several decades. Just as Antony Sutton demonstrated with regards to the Soviet Union in Cold War 1.0, the neo-Red Menace of Cold War 2.0 is similarly a paper tiger constructed by the same network of 3D chess players on the global chessboard and for the same purpose: to prepare the public for the inevitable “solution.”
Solution: War
Are you a pawn on their chessboard?
As I’ve often had cause to observe, you don’t need to have a crystal ball to see where this is headed: war.
Yes, we all know that we are in the preparatory stages to outright confrontation right now. The pieces are being set in place, the narrative is being formed, and the pawns in the game (you and me) are being told why we will have to fight and die for the glory of our square on the grand chessboard.
But this is a phoney narrative. In reality, there is a war taking place, but the war is not a war between China and the US. It’s taking place between the so-called, self-appointed “Superclass” that stands over and above this nation-state system and the average person.
The end goal is not to destroy either the American Empire or the Chinese Communist system, but to merge these systems into the worst of both worlds, a technocratic tyranny where the few rule over the many. This is, in some ways, the very premise of all of the work that I have been doing here at The Corbett Report for the past 14 years, so either you get it by now or you don’t. But if you don’t, this explanation might be the easiest way for you to understand the concept.
If you do understand it, then I think it is imperative that we make a commitment right now not to be swept up in the war hysteria that will inevitably be sweeping over the population in the coming years. We cannot control the 2D chessboard ourselves, but we can at least control what role we have in this game and can refuse to play the part of obedient pawns in the game.
In the end, the average Joe (or Zhou) on the streets of Shanghai is not your mortal enemy. The actual threat to your life and livelihood come from the would-be misleaders who have lied to you about 9/11 and the war of terror and weapons of mass destruction and the 2008 financial crisis and the wars in Libya/Syria/Yemen and COVID-1984 and nearly everything else of importance.
The politicians and establishment media mouthpieces for the real ruling oligarchy—the 3D chess players who are manipulating this game for their own benefit—are now trying to gin the public up into hysteria over the growing Chinese menace even as they’re attempting to implement Chinese-style lockdowns and facial recognition systems and social credit scores at home.
Are you going to fall for it?
This weekly editorial is part of The Corbett Report Subscriber newsletter.
To support The Corbett Report and to access the full newsletter, please sign up to become a member of the website.
Gov. Ron DeSantis Opposes Vaccine Passports in Florida
Good for Governor Ron DeSantis. In sharp contrast with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo who recently imposed “vaccine passport” requirements for people in New York to attend certain events, DeSantis is standing up for freedom and against the imposing of vaccine passports in Florida.
In a Thursday press conference, DeSantis stated his firm opposition to vaccine passports, as well as to requiring people to demonstrate they have tested negative for coronavirus. A WCJB-TV report quotes DeSantis’ comments on the matter from the press conference:
‘I just want to make very clear in Florida, we are not doing any vaccine passports,’ Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said during his news conference on Thursday afternoon. ‘I think it’s a bad idea. And so that will not happen. And so folks should get vaccinated if they want to obviously provide that. But under no circumstances will the state be asking you to show proof of vaccination.’
‘And I don’t think private companies should be doing that either,’ added DeSantis. ‘So we’re going to look into see what we need to do to be able to make sure we’re protecting Floridians. But I do think it would be a big problem to start going down the road of vaccine passports.’
…
‘You have some of these states saying to go to a sporting event, you have to show either a negative test or a vaccine proof. I think you just got to make decisions. If you want to go to an event go to an event if you don’t don’t, but to be requiring people to provide all this proof,’ said DeSantis. ‘That’s not how you get society back to normal. So we’re rejecting any vaccine passports here in the state of Florida.’
This remarkable article was spotted and shared by E.V.H., but before we get to it, a little background. Regular readers here may recall that some weeks ago I blogged about Klaus Schwab, the perpetually scowling figure who heads the World Economic Forum. I noted at the time that Schwab seemed very much like the character of Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld, the fictitious villain and head of SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) from the James Bond films. I wasn’t the only one who noticed, apparently, because shortly after that, pictures of Schwab in a gray uniform, holding a white cat ala SPECTRE’s Blohfeld, began to appear on the internet. But on a more serious note, I also observed in that blog that little to nothing appeared to have been known about Schwab’s family, and there was a curious lacuna in his biography at that time from when he completed his degrees to his emergence on the world stage as the spokesman for Mr. Globaloney and The Great Financial Reset.
Apparently, others observed this curious lack of details about Schwab, and set out to remedy that situation in the very lengthy article below, which appeared just last February along with a rather flattering picture illustration of Schwab himself:
We pick up the story with Schwab’s father Eugen, a manager for a Swiss-German company, Escher-Wyss in Schwab’s home town of Ravensburg. The allegations are revealing:
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
From this point, the article traces how some of Escher-Wyss’s hydro-turbine technology made it into the Nazi atom-bomb project via the Norsk heavy water production plant in Norway. Here the article goes a bit awry claiming that heavy water was vital for the production of plutonium for that project. As I’ve outlined in my book Reich of the Black Sun, the German project, while it knew of the possibility of plutonium, also knew that its production could only be accomplished in a reactor, and that it would be a long and difficult project. It thus concentrated on the less complicated project of uranium isotope separation and enrichment for a uranium-fueled bomb. But in either case heavy water could be used both as a neutron moderator in a reactor, and more importantly, as a source of deuterium fuel for a “boosted fission” bomb, which is what I’ve been arguing in my various books about the Nazi atom bomb project.
And Schwab’s father headed a firm in Ravensbruck with ties to that project. Let that sink in a moment. As such, Schwab’s father was also allegedly involved in another infamous Nazi practice:
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
This of course does not implicate Klaus Schwab himself in any of these practices nor does it implicate him in any way with sympathy for the practice nor the ideology behind it. It does, however, raise a yellow flag of caution, and perhaps should provide a context in which to view his own statements to the effect that “you vill not own property und you vill be happy!” This, plus the fact that Schwab seems to have pursued academic studies of mechanical engineering in relationship to macroeconomics of credit and export, might indicate at least some filial interest in his father’s wartime experiences, since after his studies and a stint in the USA at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, he went to work for his father’s old company.
The atom bomb connection would continue at Escher-Wyss (now Sulzer-Escher-Wyss) after the war, as it became involved in South Africa’s effort to acquire the bomb:
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh. (Boldface emphasis added)
This now ratchets up the suspicion meter considerably, when placed into context of what else is known about the South African project. In 1973 the New York Times book division published a book by Barbara Rogers and Zdenek Cervenka titled The Nuclear Axis: The Secret Collaboration between West Germany and South Africa, a title which says it all… almost. The authors detail how a Luftwaffe general in the Bundeswehr, himself a holdover from World War II, and several German firms including Degussa(which was also involved in the wartime Nazi atom bomb effort), were involved in aiding South Africa to acquire the atom bomb, which in the opinion of many (including this author) it did. The arrangement was a “tidy” one: in exchange for South African uranium, Germany would supply the technology to enrich it and the engineering to turn it into a bomb. South Africa became the front behind which postwar Germany acquired nuclear weapons technology, for the South African bomb was in effect a German one…
… and an Israeli one, because the third partner in this picture was Israel itself, lending technical assistance as well in return for a steady supply of uranium from the project. The arrangement was a rather nifty one, given that all three states were in some measure and for very different reasons each a pariah state, and each viewed its national security was being jeopardized without nuclear weapons.
But now we find Schwab himself – Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld and SPECTRE – squatting in the middle of that West German-South African atom bomb effort.
The implications here are inescapable, and the article’s author, Johnny Vedmore, doesn’t shrink from mentioning them:
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The last question that should be asked about the real motivations behind the actions of Herr Schwab, may be the most important for the future of humanity: Is Klaus Schwab trying to create the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or is he trying to create the Fourth Reich?
For my part, readers can already guess the answer, for I’ve been trying for years to warn people about a post-war “Nazi International,” an “extra-territorial state” hiding behind a complex tapestry of corporations, funds, foundations, think tanks, and a bewildering labyrinth of interconnections, all still firmly in the grasp of a hideous ideology.
See you on the flip side…
Pastor James Coates to Be Released From Edmonton, Canada Jail as Crown Withdraws Charges
EDMONTON: The Justice Centre today announced that Crown Prosecutors have agreed to withdraw all but one of the Public Health Act offences that Pastor James Coates has been charged with. The Justice Centre expects Pastor Coates will be released from jail in the coming days, without any conditions, pending his May 3-5 trial in Provincial Court.
The Justice Centre will defend Pastor Coates on one remaining charge of violating an Order of the Chief Medical Officer of Health by challenging the lawfulness of the public health order that he is charged with violating.
The Pastor of Grace Life Church near Edmonton has been incarcerated in the Edmonton Remand Centre for a month, since February 16. It is expected that Pastor Coates could be released from jail as early as Friday, March 19.
Grace Life is a church of nearly 400 congregants who have exercised their Charter rights and freedoms normally since July of 2020, including their freedoms of assembly, association, expression, religion and conscience. Not one congregant has been lost to Covid, but, sadly, a congregant was lost to the Alberta Government lockdown in the first week of February when he died prematurely because he couldn’t get the cancer treatment he needed due to government lockdown restrictions.
Pastor Coates and Grace Life Church are represented by the Justice Centre in respect of tickets and court summons. The Pastor and his church have been taken to court by Alberta Health Services (AHS) and ordered to close by AHS for holding regular church services and refusing to turn congregants away.
The Justice Centre sent a letter to Premier Jason Kenney on February 17, 2021, challenging him to assume responsibility for protecting the Charter rights and freedoms of Albertans, and to cease allowing an unelected health official, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, to violate rights and freedoms with health orders that are not reviewed by, or approved by, the elected Members of the Legislative Assembly.
Pastor Coates has been jailed in the Edmonton Remand Centre since February 16, after he refused to sign a bail condition that required him to effectively promise to stop exercising his Charter freedoms of conscience, religion, expression, association and peaceful assembly.
On Sunday, February 7, after the morning worship service, two RCMP officers met with Pastor Coates and a few others in his office at the Church and told Pastor Coates that he was under arrest.
The officers imposed a condition on the Pastor that he only hold church if he followed all the public health restrictions, such as permitting only 15% of his congregants to attend a Sunday morning worship service. Pastor Coates explained to the officers that he could not agree to abide by Charter-violating public health orders that prevent him from fulfilling his duty as a minister to lead his congregation in worship. As Pastor Coates did not agree to the condition imposed on him, RCMP should have taken him before a Justice of the Peace, but they did not and, instead, left the church.
Pastor Coates again held church on Sunday February 14. On Monday, February 15, the RCMP asked Pastor Coates to attend at the RCMP station. When Pastor Coates arrived, the RCMP charged him with multiple Public Health Act offences and a criminal offence related to the bail condition imposed on February 7th.
A bail hearing took place on Tuesday, February 16. Crown Prosecutor Karen Thorsrud asked the court to keep Pastor Coates in jail until he could appear for trial. A Justice of the Peace ordered Pastor Coates released on bail on the condition that he only hold church if he followed all the public health restrictions. Pastor Coates could not, in good conscience, agree to such a Charter rights-violating condition of release and was therefore detained at the Edmonton Remand Centre.
Crown prosecutors have now agreed that Pastor Coates can be released without conditions and will withdraw all but one of the Public Health Act charges against him. Prosecutors have also agreed to withdraw the criminal charge in connection with the condition imposed by RCMP on February 7, and instead have charged Pastor Coates $100 for breaching the condition, which Pastor Coates has agreed to pay.
The single charge remaining has not been withdrawn, as the Justice Centre and Pastor Coates want the matter heard at trial, to determine the constitutionality of the public health order that churches only hold worship services at 15% capacity, and to compel the government to produce scientific evidence that might support these violations of Charter freedoms. The trial is scheduled to take place beginning on May 3, 2021.
“The condition that Pastor Coates effectively stop doing his job as a pastor by adhering to unscientific and unconstitutional public health restrictions should never have been imposed on him by the RCMP, or by the Court. We are hopeful that he will finally be released from jail without conditions, and can resume pastoring Grace Life church,” states Justice Centre president John Carpay.
“We look forward appearing in court in May and demanding the government provide evidence that public health restrictions that violate the freedoms of religion, peaceful assembly, expression and association are scientific and are justifiable in a free and democratic country,” concludes Carpay.
The Dancing Fascists and Their Willful Destruction of Irish Culture
St Patrick’s Day is a good time for reflection for Irish people all over the world.
It is also a good day to acknowledge the death of a nation and an appropriate time to remember how delinquents within our own country are laying waste to an ancient land and its values. It is a perfect time to take a look in the mirror and ask why we have allowed a small percentage of slithering reptiles to sabotage and hijack our nation, while the future of our children hangs in the balance. St Patrick’s Day should be a day to celebrate the culture and history of a unique nation of people. Instead, it is a day of mourning, as the very things that make us Irish have been stripped away from us. The cosy pubs, the sing-songs, the family get-togethers, the friendly fireside camaraderie, the banter, the craic, the dancing, – all gone, given away; with consent and complacency.
Well, not quite the dancing…..
As the slithering reptiles betray the people and bow to the demands of those who own them, they rely on a faction within our population to enforce their criminality. The Masonic Irish political mafia depends on the willful ignorance of useful idiots to crush dissent, while they pursue their agenda. These useful idiots, in Ireland, are known as the Garda Siochana. They are tasked with enforcement of tyranny as those same slithering reptiles construct a prison for society. The Garda Siochana adhere to the orders, thus allowing this nightmarish, dystopian future to be built. That same nightmarish, dystopian future that the members of the Garda Siochana are helping to build is the very one that their own children and grandchildren will have to suffer. The Garda Siochana will have a responsibility, each member individually, to look into their children’s eyes someday and explain to them their reasoning. They will have to answer, ‘why did you assist in building this hellhole?’ They will have to find an answer to the question ‘what were you doing when they were taking our freedoms and liberties?’. And they will respond;
‘We were dancing’
And they were.
Earlier this year, Irish Gardai, around the country, went viral on social media as they danced for the European banking cartels, the City of London financial institution, the Davos ‘elite’, Wall Street and her Majesty the Queen, celebrating the transfer of wealth from the people they swore an oath to serve. Jacob Rothschild must have had a hard-on, as he watched clueless Freemason subordinates, dance to the tune of Jerusalema, in tribute to the Zionist Israeli Defence Force Fascists and the impending Palestinian-style prison our planet is about to become. Well done boys and girls.
On completion, they advanced their reign of Fascism in the towns, streets and villages of Ireland, determined to crush any form of culture or tradition left on the island. They would go after the Irish sibin, for example – a dangerous outpost; one where you can find all kinds of dangerous, illicit activities, including, at best, palavering, crooning, prattling and tittle-tattle or, at worst, shimmying and jamming. One such hazardous hot spot was discovered in County Offaly. Thankfully, Garda Siochana and their dedicated Operation Navigation personnel put an end to it, thus obliterating any form of merriment that may have potentially arisen out of the abhorrent site.
Other ominous places of entertainment have been found in the country and the Gardai have acted in a likewise manner, recognising them as locations where people could enjoy the craic and have a laugh. One of them was so outrageous, its residents were even known to have been watching football together. The traumatic images were hard to handle, but the fine officers of the force, handled it like professionals, shutting it down and avoiding further incidents of laughter and happiness. A true deathtrap in the eyes of our Fuhrers, it was a symbol of an earlier time, one of fun and freedom; when the Irish had a lifestyle worth envying. It could not be tolerated anymore, under any circumstances.
The attacks on traditional Irish pubs by Gardai have been innumerable. They have deliberately chosen key dates on the calendar such as New Year’s Eve to throw their weight around, putting a halt to the social events of countless individuals in several regions of the nation. Fraternizing and mingling have been reduced to forbidden acts in their eyes, as they exert their illusory authority all over the island, from County Monaghan to County Kerry, decimating the age-old Irish custom of friendly interaction and comradeship.
Of course, they are not just responsible for the breaking up of private parties and family gatherings, but also the devastation to Irish bars all over the nation as it is predicted that at least 2000 of them will not be able to afford themselves the opportunity of reopening, due to the economic damage of lockdowns; which we must remind ourselves are enforced by the Gardai.
Similarly, closures have been experienced by the religious institutions of our island. In a blatant act of aggression, a Catholic priest in the country was found to have been handing out the Eucharist to devoted worshippers in a church in Dublin. One of the city’s media outlets, ‘Dublin Live’ described the illegal operation as ‘sneaky’ when people lined up in secret to accept Holy Communion. It was evident that Ireland was rapidly descending into a nation of criminals as lonely, frustrated, elderly men and women were engaged in the covert consumption of the ‘body of Christ’ in what can only be described as surreptitious circumstances. The spiritual support was condemned by Gardai and the priest was warned not to repeat his mistakes.
This was a throwback to the events of Brigid’s Day when Irish Catholics showed up at a shrine in Co. Louth to pray to the Second Patron Saint of Ireland, after St. Patrick. Our Dancing Fascists soon put a stop to this hooliganism as they deployed their finest and arrested the devotees, doing a great service to the occult, Kabbalah-reading, Christian-hating, Zionist financiers who they now work to appease.
The Church is not the only symbol of tradition that the Garda Siochana target in their servitude of the Globalists. They have also zoomed in on the centuries-old sporting activities that are unique to Ireland. The art of Gaelic football is world-renowned as a passionate past-time for many Irish people. For this reason, in the ‘New Normal’ that attempts to decimate anything that is pro-human such as sports and leisure, the Gardai have broken up post-GAA match dinner parties and removed spectators from the stands.
They’ve even pounced on the ‘Wandering Irish’ as they lay siege to the timely tradition of travel, synonymous with the people of this nation who have journeyed extensively, exploring the four corners of the earth. Yet another age-old habit terminated by the Irish government and prohibited at the hands of the Garda Siochana, who are penalising those who attempt to leave the country.
Culture and tradition are anathemas to the authorities in Ireland today. When a Minister within the country publicly denounces the extremely Irish practice of drinking alcohol on St. Patrick’s Day and urges people to drink water instead, you know that there is an outright war on the country’s heritage. St. Patrick would be rolling in his grave if he watched the 2,500 Gardai, including air, dog and mounted units, occupy the land, in all their arrogant Fascism, determined to defecate on the one day of the year that celebrates Irishness. Purposely and actively, the Yellow Streak brigade stand with their heads held high, imprisoning the population, while serving the elite agenda on a day that the eyes of the world, smilingly, gaze upon the Emerald Isle. The chant ‘shame on you’, has never been so apt.
Of course, there are many who will declare that such policing is implemented to keep us safe against a deadly virus. And I would say, if you think that is the truth, I’ve got a bridge in Dublin called the Ha’penny I’d like to sell you.
As the Dancing Fascists put their boot down on the day of Irish observance, 4000 foreign nationals prepare to fly into the country to commence work in fields picking fruit. Now, as someone who has travelled and worked in several countries worldwide, I am very open to hard-working individuals chasing their ambitions, packing up and setting off across the waters to earn a living for themselves and their families. What I’m not open to is the bullshit coming out of the politicians’ mouths as they struggle to get their stories straight – shutting down the nation on the pretense of a pandemic, yet flying thousands in to work here. Nonsense. It is about as credible as the tale that there were 56 million cases of influenza in a 12 month period in the United States alone – and then one day, just like that, they all magically disappeared. It’s another case of sell-out vermin called politicians lying, in order to destroy their nation’s economy at the behest of Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab and the pharmaceutical and banking mafia cartel.
Some may also say that not all Gardai are bad. And I would agree. But we could have said the same thing about the Gestapo or the SS. Rudolf Hoess was generally, at face value, said to be a nice guy. Those that knew him considered him sociable, friendly and helpful to those around him. A study of his book, Commandant of Auschwitz, reveals that he was a devoted family man, well-spoken, articulate and in many ways considerate and caring. This does not excuse the fact that millions were murdered under his watch. Many believe it was not an evil intention that drove him to this but instead, a commitment that he made to ‘just follow orders’. It is obvious today that a huge number of Irish Gardai, and indeed law enforcement personnel worldwide, are doing just that. However, this is no excuse and they cannot be forgiven.
They are complicit in the destruction of the culture and tradition of the nation and in the ravaging of businesses and establishments throughout the land. They have assaulted freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to dissent and freedom of movement. They are greatly responsible for the wave of mental health issues and suicides presently plaguing our nation.
What’s even worse, is that when people of this nation go out on the streets to push back against the Fascism that is been carried out and object to the soul-destroying mandates of the political slime that run the country on behalf of billionaire gangsters, the Gardai are the very first to lace up their boots, don their badges and wield their batons as they shell out fines, brutalize and detain. They are the very first to defend their overlords; the very first to abuse those that love their country and their freedom enough to stand up against the imposed tyranny.
In my book, The COVID-19 Illusion; A Cacophony of Lies, I warned of the dangers that would come when the Garda Siochana were given unprecedented power over the people of Ireland. I briefly outlined their century-long sins against all walks of life in this country, their framing of innocent people and their bullying, brutish actions towards women and children. The lockdown and COVID-19 debacle have brought the true nature of the Irish policing institute out for all to see. They have disgraced themselves. They have spat in the faces of the people of this country, they have urinated on its culture and they treated its tradition like excrement. For this, the Garda Siochana, for generations to come, will be remembered as an organization that turned its back on the people and pledged its allegiance to the slithering reptiles of the banking and pharmaceutical cartels and the diseased Irish government. For this reason, Gardai will have a lot of explaining to do. They will have to explain themselves not just to the population at large but to their own families as well. They have chosen their position and are now sitting on the wrong side of history.
One thing’s for sure, the Dancing Fascists won’t be able to foxtrot their way out of this one too easily…..
Happy St. Patrick’s Day to one and all from Ireland!
People who desire the protection of freedom from overreaching government have much to be concerned about in President Joe Biden’s Thursday speech focused on coronavirus and coronavirus-related government actions. Yet, likely the most dangerous to freedom proposition in Biden’s speech is an assertion he made that goes far beyond coronavirus-related matters — that the United States government is the same as “us,” the American people.
Biden declared in the speech:
Look, we know what we need to do to beat this virus: Tell the truth. Follow the scientists and the science. Work together. Put trust and faith in our government to fulfill its most important function, which is protecting the American people — no function more important.
We need to remember the government isn’t some foreign force in a distant capital. No, it’s us. All of us. “We the People.” For you and I, that America thrives when we give our hearts, when we turn our hands to common purpose. And right now, my friends, we are doing just that. And I have to say, as your President, I am grateful to you.
Biden is far from the first politician to assert that the American people are the government. Over forty years ago — in 1974, Murray Rothbard examined this absurd, dangerous, and often repeated claim in his essay “The Anatomy of the State.” Rothbard’s essay begins with a section titled “What the State Is Not” that reads like a direct response to the claim in Biden’s speech. Rothbard wrote:
The State is almost universally considered an institution of social service. Some theorists venerate the State as the apotheosis of society; others regard it as an amiable, though often inefficient, organization for achieving social ends; but almost all regard it as a necessary means for achieving the goals of mankind, a means to be ranged against the “private sector” and often winning in this competition of resources. With the rise of democracy, the identification of the State with society has been redoubled, until it is common to hear sentiments expressed which violate virtually every tenet of reason and common sense such as, “we are the government.” The useful collective term “we” has enabled an ideological camouflage to be thrown over the reality of political life. If “we are the government,” then anything a government does to an individual is not only just and untyrannical but also “voluntary” on the part of the individual concerned. If the government has incurred a huge public debt which must be paid by taxing one group for the benefit of another, this reality of burden is obscured by saying that “we owe it to ourselves”; if the government conscripts a man, or throws him into jail for dissident opinion, then he is “doing it to himself” and, therefore, nothing untoward has occurred. Under this reasoning, any Jews murdered by the Nazi government were not murdered; instead, they must have “committed suicide,” since they were the government (which was democratically chosen), and, therefore, anything the government did to them was voluntary on their part. One would not think it necessary to belabor this point, and yet the overwhelming bulk of the people hold this fallacy to a greater or lesser degree.
We must, therefore, emphasize that “we” are not the government; the government is not “us.” The government does not in any accurate sense “represent” the majority of the people. But, even if it did, even if 70 percent of the people decided to murder the remaining 30 percent, this would still be murder and would not be voluntary suicide on the part of the slaughtered minority. No organicist metaphor, no irrelevant bromide that “we are all part of one another,” must be permitted to obscure this basic fact.
If, then, the State is not “us,” if it is not “the human family” getting together to decide mutual problems, if it is not a lodge meeting or country club, what is it? Briefly, the State is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular, it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion. While other individuals or institutions obtain their income by production of goods and services and by the peaceful and voluntary sale of these goods and services to others, the State obtains its revenue by the use of compulsion; that is, by the use and the threat of the jailhouse and the bayonet. Having used force and violence to obtain its revenue, the State generally goes on to regulate and dictate the other actions of its individual subjects. One would think that simple observation of all States through history and over the globe would be proof enough of this assertion; but the miasma of myth has lain so long over State activity that elaboration is necessary.
The Delta Hospice Society in British Columbia refuses to provide MAID (medical assistance in dying) aka facilitating a suicide and for that the Canadian government has evicted all the patients, they are shutting down the hospice and they are taking over the property as well!
There are other facilities that offer that service literally within walking distance of the hospice but for the Canadian Government that doesn’t matter, if you refuse to help someone kill themselves, they’ll shut you down.
In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth speaks with the president of the Delta Hospice Angelina Ireland about the battle to keep people alive when the government is the only obstacle!
For those who have been paying attention, the “experts” on the coronavirus have been the complete opposite of consistent when it comes to advising Americans and the rest of the planet on how to react to the pandemic. Since the lockdowns began last year, hypocrisy has been at the forefront and masks are on the main stage.
It’s not just hypocrisy either, the police state tyranny across the planet in regard to COVID-19 measures has exploded and those who resist are being treated worse than violent rapists, literally.
As the following case illustrates, a violation of a mask mandate can land you in jail without bail as a violent rapist is granted bail.
Australia has been on the forefront of the COVID-19 police state insanity and the following is a perfect example of why that is. Last month, in response to an increase in positive tests, the state of Ellenbrook went into yet another lockdown.
According to the lockdown rules, anyone who steps foot outside of their own home is required to wear a mask. It does not matter if you are alone or not. If you are visible in public, despite being completely alone, you must wear a mask or you will be fined.
A 41-year-old man refused to comply with this order to wear a mask outside in February, so he was subsequently arrested for it.
“When it was established he did not have a face mask, he was offered one free by officers to assist him to comply with the legal requirement,” police said.
“At this stage, there was no intention to arrest or charge the man.
“However, once it was confirmed the man was aware of the legal requirement, had the ability to now comply with the requirement, and he continued to fail to comply with the direction, the officers acted in the best interests of the community and arrested him.”
“He was arrested and taken to the Perth Magistrates Court, where he was refused bail and remanded in custody,” 7 News reported.
When the man was arraigned after his arrest, the court denied him bail and held him in a cage instead of letting him out. Let that sink in. He wasn’t wearing a mask, alone and outside, and he was arrested and denied bail for it. This is not in the interest of a free society nor in the interest of science.
Highlighting the insanity of such tyrannical measures over not wearing a mask is the fact that a violent rapist was granted bail just days before the anti-masker’s denial of bail.
Across the island in Townsville, a 19-year-old man accused of the violent rape of 66-year-old woman on a Townsville walking path was granted bail.
This teen violently raped a 66-year-old woman in public and he was granted bail. What’s more, on the same day he violently raped a senior citizen, he also attacked a different woman “causing grievous bodily harm.”
Witnesses saw the man grab the 66-year-old woman from the walking path and drag her into the bush where she was violently raped.
“It’s offending of a heinous character, there were multiple victims who were strangers to the applicant,” Prosecutor Molly Mahlouzarides said, according to ABC.
“The attacks, the violence inflicted on these women was entirely out of the blue and one of those incidents unfolded in a public place as the woman was on her morning walk.”
Despite the random nature of the attacks and the high probability that they will happen again, the court granted the man bail and he walked out of jail to stay with his grandparents.
In the meantime, the man who refused to wear a mask rots in a cage with no bail being granted.
When the state treats those who disobey mask orders worse than they treat violent rapists, it’s high time we question their intentions.
ALBERTA: The Justice Centre is pleased to announce the continued withdrawal of tickets issued to citizens for alleged violations of public health orders. In the latest development, the Alberta provincial Crown prosecutor has withdrawn three tickets, and a municipal crown prosecutor has withdrawn one.
The Justice Centre represents close to 100 individuals who have been ticketed for allegedly breaching public health orders in BC, AB, SK and ON for allegedly participating in peaceful protests, not wearing a mask, providing services during lockdowns, not complying with public health guidelines on signage, and other issues surrounding the Charter freedoms to move, travel, assemble, associate, worship and express themselves. So far, all COVID-related tickets issued to rally demonstrators in Alberta that the Justice Centre has defended have been withdrawn by Crown Prosecutors before trial.
Ryan Audette (pictured at right) is a Calgary man who was issued a $50 ticket at the end of November, for allegedly not wearing a mask, while exercising his Charter rights to attend a peaceful protest against lockdowns. An estimated one thousand people were at the rally in downtown Calgary.
The ticket for not wearing a mask in a “public premise” was first issued to Mr. Audette under the Calgary Face Covering Bylaw. Calgary Police Service Constable L. Clarke seemed confused about whether the Bylaw mandated mask-wearing outdoors or only indoors. The Bylaw defines “public premises” as “all or any part of a building, structure or other enclosed area to which members of the public have access as of right or by express or implied invitation[.]” On March 2, 2021, Calgary Crown Prosecutor Maggie Burlington notified the Justice Centre that the ticket will be withdrawn.
Trevor Marr (pictured left) was issued a $1200 ticket under the Public Health Act after getting off a C-train and noticing a protest rally on December 19 in downtown Calgary. After noticing the large crowd, Mr. Marr decided to make a spur of the moment decision and go and listen. Says Mr. Marr, “I agreed with what the Speaker was saying, the restrictions resembled Communist China more than freedom-of-speech-Canada. It felt good to live in a Democracy where I thought we were free to protest!”
Calgary Police officers subsequently ticketed Mr. Marr $1200 under the Public Health Act, for allegedly contravening an order of the Medical Officer of Health. On February 25, 2021, the Justice Centre was advised that the Crown was withdrawing the ticket.
Bernie Driedger (pictured at right) is a primary care paramedic who was issued a $1200 ticket on December 22, 2020, for not wearing a mask while buying a turkey and ham in a small Co-op grocery store in La Crete, Alberta. He was photographed, he believes, by a “nosy out-of-towner going around town taking pictures of La Crete residents and businesses because the majority of people refuse to wear masks.” “I believe the photo was sent in to the provincial snitch line,” he explains.
Mr. Driedger says he has lost trust in his fellow citizens and has since moved out of the community. He received a three-day suspension from work because of the photograph. “On a personal level, I believe wearing a mask is unnatural, unsanitary, and predominately anti God… I believe it to be symbolic. Wearing a mask shows the world I am easily compliant and am a willing participant in orders unsubstantiated by proper science or reason. This also shows that if I give a little on my convictions here, maybe I will give more in the next rollout of unjust violations of our freedoms,” he explains.
Mr. Driedger’s ticket has been withdrawn by the Provincial Crown Prosecutor.
Trevor Simpson (pictured left) is a Calgary man who was ticketed $1200 for allegedly not practicing safe social distancing, at a lockdown protest in Calgary on Boxing Day. He says police waited until he was three blocks away from the rally and alone, and was blocked by four Calgary Police Service officers on bicycles. “It was really outlandish to me that they would wait until I was no longer breaking the law to actually fine me!” says Mr. Simpson. “I told the police as they were writing the ticket that it went against my Charter rights and I did not believe the ticket was legal and fair.”
Mr. Simpson’s ticket has been withdrawn by the Provincial Crown Prosecutor.
“Public health officials are not the supreme law of the land – the Constitution is,” noted Jay Cameron, Litigation Director for the Justice Centre. “A significant portion of the arbitrary and confusing public health orders which have so oppressed Canadian society are, on their face, unconstitutional and cannot be justified. As a result, many of the tickets issued for the supposed violation of such orders will never be prosecuted. We expect the mass withdrawal of Covid tickets to continue as prosecutors across the country correctly decide to stay charges.”
A moving appeal from a woman in Israel discussing the vaccine apartheid discrimination coercion currently being enforced upon the Israeli people at a rapid rate.
Refusal of fundamental services without a green passport.
A tearful Llana Rachel appeals to the rest of the world “This is coming to the rest of the world.
Please get this out to the world.
There are media blocks and censorship as to what is really happening and it’s terrible.”
Meet Montreal-based salesman Shmarya Plotkin. He makes several trips via automobile every year to New York state, given that the lion’s share of his customer base is in the U.S.A. He’s been making these trips without incident for some 25 years. But recently, when driving back to Quebec, things went sideways — big time.
Firstly, he encountered a gruff border agent who asked Shmarya if he had bought anything in the U.S.
Since Shmarya is an honest man, he provided an honest answer, that he had indeed bought a few boxes of pasta costing about $15. So much for honesty being the best policy. This seemed to inexplicably trigger the border guard, to such an extent that he told Shmarya he had to be immediately quarantined at a Montreal hotel! What’s more, he had to drive there without making any stops, even though Shmarya’s house was on the way, and he wanted to grab some food and a change of clothing. But he was sternly told that there were no exceptions to this rule.
When he got to the hotel, the front desk employees didn’t even know the property was being used as a quarantine facility! Shmarya was eventually told to go to a side entrance that was manned by a security guard.
The room he was placed in was tiny and hot, no matter how he tinkered with the thermostat. By this time, Shmarya was famished, but when his meal came, it was ghastly, and in a quantity that would make a budgie pine for more. (Shmarya was forbidden to have a delivery service bring food to him.)
Eventually, he reached a boiling point, and decided to leave the hotel where he’d been ordered to quarantine. When he encountered interference from a security guard, he called media outlet TVA — and the police. The police told the security guards they could not forcibly confine him, and soon Shmarya was making a beeline home to his wife and children. It was, in a word, a nightmare. And it was perpetrated for absolutely no good reason.
Check out my interview with Shmarya here. And take heed of the moral of the story: there is nothing that prevents authorities from lying to you — such as telling you that you MUST stay captive in a quarantine hotel…
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has asked Alberta Premier Jason Kenney to rescind the health orders of the Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, which unfairly discriminate as between restaurants and houses of worship.
The Justice Centre’s letter concerns Edmonton-area pastor James Coates, who is currently in jail for exercising his Charter freedoms of conscience, religion, association and peaceful assembly.
The Justice Centre is representing Grace Life Church (Grace Life), a large church near Edmonton, and its pastor James Coates. Alberta Health Services (AHS) has ticketed Pastor Coates, taken Grace Life and Pastor Coates to court, and even attempted to completely shut the Church down. Background information on Pastor Coates’ ordeal is available here. Pastor Coates was arrested and placed in jail on February 16, 2021, after the Pastor refused to agree to conditions that he stop attending and holding church services as normal.
The Justice Centre is appealing this imprisonment of an Alberta pastor to the Court of Queen’s Bench.
The Justice Centre has filed legal action in response to news that the Trudeau government will force Canadian residents into mandatory quarantine, in a hotel at their own expense, after returning from international travel.
The new mandatory quarantine takes effect February 22. Full details of the government’s plan can be reviewed here.
We first issued a news release outlining the situation, and then a legal demand letter to the Government demanding that they stop this practice immediately and release anyone they may be currently holding in federal facilities. Despite the pending litigation, the Trudeau government has decided to proceed with this forced confinement of travellers. The legal action will be heard in Federal Court.
Trudeau also announced all Canadian airlines had agreed to cancel all the flights to ‘sun and sand destinations’ until the end of April, including Mexico and the Caribbean.
“We all agree that now is just not the time to be flying,” Trudeau said.
However, not all Canadians agree. The Justice Centre has received thousands of emails since the federal government announced that Canadians returning to the country, regardless of their reason for travel, will be forced into mandatory quarantine, in a hotel at their own expense of $2000 for a three day stay.
Also, it should be noted that the new measures are being implemented under Transport Canada and the Aeronautics Act. There is still people being detained for not having any Covid tests under the Quarantine Act, which is a different issue. The government began requiring all people arriving in Canada by air to show a negative PCR-based Covid test in early January.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced February 9 that anyone arriving at a land border with the U.S. after February 15 will be required to have taken a COVID-19 test 72 hours before seeking entry.
According to Global News, “lack of a negative test won’t necessarily prevent people from entering the country. Should Canadians or permanent residents not be able to provide that test result, they could face “severe penalties,” including fines of up to $3,000 per person. Trudeau said his government will also be implementing new measures to ensure “extensive follow up by Health Canada” to ensure they are getting tested and properly quarantining. “It’s not legal to refuse entry to a Canadian who wants to come home. That’s the major difference between land borders and air borders. You can prevent someone from boarding a flight in Miami or elsewhere, you can’t prevent someone standing at a land border crossing from coming into Canada, because technically they’re already on Canadian soil,” Trudeau said to reporters.” Starting Feb. 22, travellers entering Canada at the land border will also be required to take a COVID-19 molecular test on arrival as well as toward the end of their 14-day quarantine.
From what we know right now, if a Canadian citizen or permanent resident shows up at the land border without a negative test, officials cannot deny you entry as you are a Canadian citizen on homeland, and you will not be taken to a quarantine facility, however the federal government has stated travellers could be given tickets of up to $3000 per day. You will be required to go home and quarantine.
If you are detained or receive a ticket as a result of returning home, please contact the Justice Centre by filling out a case submission.
John Edmunds is on top of the world. He’s one of the modelling-paper mafiosi.
The London, U.K., professor is a key government advisor on COVID-19-related policies. Edmunds also was a co-author of one of the primary modelling papers that have been used to convince the masses that vigilance against Variant of Concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 should be their top priority.
And Edmunds co-wrote an influential January 21, 2021 report that concluded, “There is a realistic possibility that VOC B.1.1.7 is associated with an increased risk of death compared to non-VOC viruses.”
In addition, he speaks often to reporters about the deadlinessof the new variant. Edmunds tells them, for example, that a “disaster” would ensue if lockdowns are eased too soon, because what first must be done is to “vaccinate much, much, much more widely than the elderly.”
Follow the funds
Edmunds also happens to be the spouse of someone who, at least until April 2020, was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and held shares in the company. (Edmunds doesn’t disclose this in any of his media interviews that I’ve read and watched. He also doesn’t disclose his own stock holdings.)
According to an April 2020 Daily Telegrapharticle, Edmunds’s wife is Jeanne Pimenta and she works for GSK. The Daily Telegraph article states Edmunds asserted his partner had recently resigned from GSK. So it’s unclear whether Pimenta currently works there or not. I did a little digging and found that the only Jeanne Pimenta LinkedIn profile indicates she’s currently director of epidemiology at GSK, while Jeanne Pimenta’s ResearchGate profile says she’s an epidemiologist at BioMarin Pharmaceutical. (I’ll have a bit more about Edmunds being married to a present or former Glaxo employee later in this article.)
In any case, GSK’s financial success is skyrocketing. On February 3 the company announced it’s collaborating with mRNA-vaccine company CureVac to spend 150 million Euros — approx $180 million USD — to make vaccines for the new variants. That effectively gives them first-entrant advantage in vaccines for the new variants. And that same Feb. 3 news release touts the new-variant vaccines as also able to serve as ‘booster’ shots after the initial rounds of vaccination.
Not only that: this fall GSK together with another international pharmaceutical firm, Sanofi, are scheduled to start producing what could turn out to be up to one billion doses of their COVID-19 vaccine annually. GSK’s understated Feb. 3 announcement of its Q4 2020 financial results said it will “continue to expect meaningful improvement in revenues and margins” because they are “building a high-value biopharma pipeline.”
Note that GSK and other pharma companies like Moderna and Pfizer are not responsible for damage and compensation payments to people seriously injured and killed by COVID-19 vaccines. Governments will pay instead – that is, if those injured and killed and their loved ones are able to beat the long odds and get any compensation at all.
And a remarkable February 8, 2021, investigative report in the German news outlet Welt Am Sonntag (which translates to World on Sunday) reveals another impetus for the wildly inaccurate modelling governments use to keep populations in a state of fear and control. The German article shows that in March 2020 government officials enlisted “leading scientists from several research institutes and universities. Together, they were to produce a [mathematical-modelling] paper that would serve as legitimization for further tough political measures.” These scientists obediently wrote a modelling paper tailored to the government’s instructions. The then-secret paper asserted that if lockdown measures were lifted immediately, up to one million Germans would die from COVID-19, some “agonizingly at home, gasping for breath,” after being turned away from overflowing hospitals.
Edmunds Is Deeply Invested in the Vaccine World
There’s still more to the web of money and influence surrounding Edmunds and other modelling-paper mafiosi, including Neil Ferguson (information on Ferguson is in the section below titled MoreModelling Mafiosi).
The first new-variant modelling paper Edmunds co-wrote, which I mention in the second paragraph of this article, was posted on December 23, 2020. Edmunds co-authored it with his fellow members of the Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). People in the centre’s COVID-19 Working Group also contributed.
The modelling paper was posted on the e-journal Medrχiv, which publishes only non-peer-reviewed papers. The journal is the creation ofan organization headed by Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. I discuss Medrχiv and the Zuckerberg connection in my Feb. 3 article on the baselessness for the modelling papers that claim the new variants are very dangerous.
Edmunds also is dean of the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health. I contacted the institution’s media-relations department to request an interview with one of the Dec. 23, 2020, modelling paper’s authors. I didn’t receive a response.
In a Feb. 2017 video interview, Edmunds enthused that the LSHTM specializes in every aspect of vaccine development, from basic science to large-scale clinical trials. In the video he also touts using mathematical modelling as a good way to show that vaccines protect individuals and society. (And among other things he describes his group’s efforts in giving children flu vaccines and — in conjunction with Public Health England — promoting human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines for girls and boys.)
In addition, Edmunds is a key member of the UK Vaccine Network (which until recently was known as the UK Vaccines Network – the URL for the organization has ‘UK Vaccines Network‘ in it).
And he’s a member of the U.K. govenment’s Science Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), which provides Covid-measure advice — much of it related to the unprecedentedly forceful push for mass vaccination — to U.K. prime minister Boris Johnson and his cabinet.
And as mentioned earlier, Edmunds is married to a current or former GSK employee. A 2015 article that Edmunds co-authored states under ‘Competing interests’ for Edmunds that “My partner works for GSK.” Similarly, on the NERVTAG website’s conflict-disclosure pages – which for some reason haven’t been updated since Oct. 2017 – it reveals that Edmunds’s spouse works for GSK.
As a quick other note, the ‘Author Contributions and Acknowledgements’ section of the PDF of the December 23 modelling analysis of B.1.1.7 (pages 15 and 16) shows that almost all of the paper’s authors and members of the modelling centre’s COVID-19 Working Group receive funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and/or Wellcome Trust. (By the way, a search for Wellcome Trust yields the Wellcome website.)
And there’s more to the Edmunds story. Among other of my finds: he’s also on the Scientific Advisory Board for the Coalition for Epidemic Innovations (CEPI). CEPI was created primarily by the BMGF, the World Economic Forum and the major pharma company Wellcome. CEPI’s website states it was “launched in Davos [at the meeting of the World Economic Forum in January] 2017 to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics. Our mission is to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.”
Investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley last year wrote a must-read two-part analysis of the ties between the key individuals, institutions, companies and funders of the UK’s Covid-19 response. She mentioned that GSK is working with CEPI to develop COVID-19 vaccines. This alliance is still going strong today.
Note also that the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, which Edmunds heads, is primarily funded by the BMGF and the Gavi alliance. (Gavi promotes mass vaccination of people around the world — including by quarterbacking the COVAX program. Gavi’s biggest funders include the BMGF.Doctors Without Borders has criticized GAVI for being “aimed more at supporting drug-industry desires to promote new products than at finding the most efficient and sustainable means for fighting the diseases of poverty.”)
BMGF funding for the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health is growing very fast. For example, BMGF’s new grants to the faculty rose from $4.9 million USD in 2013-2014 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2014 annual report) to $13.19 million USD in 2015-2016 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2016 annual report)(top new research grants to each faculty at the LSHTM stopped being reported in the annual reports after 2017). Funding from the BMGF to the LSHTM as a whole was 30.2 million pounds ($40.2 million USD) in 2017-2018 (see page 9 [p. 6 in the PDF] in the school’s 2018 annual report).
By the way, the LSHTM also has a Vaccines Manufacturing Innovation Centre. It develops, tests and commercializes vaccines. (I couldn’t find any information on where the vaccines centre’s funding comes from.)
The vaccines centre also performs affiliated activities like combating ‘vaccine hesitancy.’ The latter includes the Vaccine Confidence Project. The project’s stated purpose is, among other things, “to provide analysis and guidance for early response and engagement with the public to ensure sustained confidence in vaccines and immunisation.”
Here’s information about two other members of this club:
– Public Health England (PHE) issued its first detailed report on the new variant in late December 2020 and continues to provide updates. None of their reports are peer-reviewed. One of the highest-profile co-authors of the PHE reports is PHE director Susan Hopkins. She’s also a professor of infectious diseases at Imperial College London. The college receives tens of millions of dollars a year from the BMGF. See for example this grant, this one, this one and this one. (I emailed PHE media relations to request an interview about PHE’s new-variants reports. PHE communications person Zahra Vindhani responded, “Dr. Hopkins won’t have the capacity for this in the upcoming weeks, and we aren’t able to confirm anyone else for this either.”)
– PHE is guided in its approach to vaccination by PHE’s “Strategic Priority 1” for combating infections diseases in 2020-2025. It is to “Optimise vaccine provision and reduce vaccine preventable diseases in England” (see p. 9 of PHE’s Infectious Disease Strategy 2020-2025).
– Ferguson’s modelling has been extremely faulty again over the years. This has been thoroughly documented. For example, as investigative journalist Beeley wrote in Part One of a two-part investigative report in April-May 2020, Ferguson’s modelling over-estimated by about three million-fold the death toll from the bird flu, also known as H5N1. As a result, a lot of money was made by bird-flu-vaccine manufacturers, ranging from Roche (for its now-infamous, ineffective Tamiflu) to Sanofi, and they were used widely.
– Ferguson also is a member, together with Edmunds and others, of SAGE.
– Another group he’s a member of is the highly influential NERVTAG. It’s the group that issued the January 21, 2021 warning, mentioned earlier in this article, that B.1.1.7 is deadly. Ferguson is a NERVTAG member even though he was reported to have resigned last spring after being caught visiting with his married lover when everyone in England was supposed to only be having contact with members of their own households (based in large part on Ferguson’s modelling and his urging the government to lock the country down).
– Ferguson also is a member of the UK Vaccines Network, along with Edmunds and others such as the Network chair Chris Whitty, who’s also the UK government’s top Covid-19 adviser Chris Whitty. The network’s focus, according to its website, “to support the [U.K.] government to identify and shortlist targeted investment opportunities for the most promising vaccines and vaccine technologies that will help combat infectious diseases with epidemic potential, and to address structural issues related to the UK’s broader vaccine infrastructure.”
These ties bind Edmunds, Ferguson and Hopkins – along with the rest of the modelling-paper mafiosi — to the bidding of governments, Big Pharma, Bill Gates and other powerful players.
They present an image of being fully devoted to the public good, while in fact actively helping to destroy it.
After obtaining an MSc in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary, Rosemary Frei became a freelance writer. For the next 22 years she was a medical writer and journalist. She pivoted again in early 2016 to full-time, independent activism and investigative journalism. Her website is RosemaryFrei.ca.
Justice Centre Sues Canadian Federal Government for Forcible Confinement of Travellers
TORONTO: The Justice Centre has filed legal action against the Federal Government in response to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declaring to media that Canadians returning from travel will be forcibly confined in hotels at a cost of $2,000 per traveller even though they return in possession of a negative PCR test.
The Justice Centre first sent a legal demand letter to Minister of Transport Omar Alghabra on January 29, 2021 warning it would sue in Federal Court if the government proceeded with its threat to confine returning Canadians at secret locations, even those who had already tested negative for Covid.
The Justice Centre represents 13 individual applicants, including Steve Duesing, pictured above, in the comprehensive new lawsuit and is advising dozens more. The non-profit law firm and registered charity has received thousands of emails of outrage from travelling Canadians since the federal government first announced that all citizens, regardless of their reason for travel, would be forced to have a Covid PCR test in order to board an airplane to return to Canada, then be forced to take another PCR test on arrival, and then be forcibly confined for up to three days while waiting for a negative test result, and also be forced to pay $2,000.
Anyone who tests positive after returning to Canada will be “immediately required to quarantine in designated government facilities,” according to Mr. Trudeau. The government is contracting security guards to enforce mandatory quarantines, with the added threat of arrest and jail for Canadians who refuse to be forcibly confined in a federal facility. On February 9, the government announced that anyone arriving by land without a negative PCR test could face fines up to $3,000. As of February 22, travellers will also be required to submit to another Covid test towards the end of a mandatory 14-day quarantine. Additional applicants may be added to the legal action as the Justice Centre proceeds.
Justice Centre lawyer Sayeh Hassan notes that Canadians travel for many reasons and the Charter guarantees the fundamental right to enter and leave Canada. “Prime Minister Trudeau has arbitrarily made special exceptions for Olympic athletes and their support teams, for example,” notes Ms. Hassan.
“Citizens are being held unlawfully despite not having been convicted of any offence, not having had access to a lawyer, and not having appeared before a judge. Law enforcement officers are apparently refusing to inform family members of where their loved ones are being held. This outrageous policy aligns with the world’s most repressive and undemocratic regimes and is totally unacceptable,” adds Ms. Hassan.
“Quarantine, particularly of healthy or asymptomatic individuals, is the functional equivalent of house arrest and the Justice Centre will not allow it to continue unchallenged.”
Techno-Censorship: The Slippery Slope From Censoring ‘Disinformation’ to Silencing Truth
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”― George Orwell
This is the slippery slope that leads to the end of free speech as we once knew it.
In a world increasingly automated and filtered through the lens of artificial intelligence, we are finding ourselves at the mercy of inflexible algorithms that dictate the boundaries of our liberties.
Martin Niemöller’s warning about the widening net that ensnares us all still applies.
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”
In our case, however, it started with the censors who went after extremists spouting so-called “hate speech,” and few spoke out—because they were not extremists and didn’t want to be shamed for being perceived as politically incorrect.
Eventually, “we the people” will be the ones in the crosshairs.
At some point or another, depending on how the government and its corporate allies define what constitutes “extremism, “we the people” might all be considered guilty of some thought crime or other.
When that time comes, there may be no one left to speak out or speak up in our defense.
Whatever we tolerate now—whatever we turn a blind eye to—whatever we rationalize when it is inflicted on others, whether in the name of securing racial justice or defending democracy or combatting fascism, will eventually come back to imprison us, one and all.
Watch and learn.
We should all be alarmed when prominent social media voices such as Donald Trump, Alex Jones, David Icke and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are censored, silenced and made to disappear from Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram for voicing ideas that are deemed politically incorrect, hateful, dangerous or conspiratorial.
The question is not whether the content of their speech was legitimate.
The concern is what happens after such prominent targets are muzzled. What happens once the corporate techno-censors turn their sights on the rest of us?
It’s a slippery slope from censoring so-called illegitimate ideas to silencing truth. Eventually, as George Orwell predicted, telling the truth will become a revolutionary act.
Knowing what we know about the government’s tendency to define its own reality and attach its own labels to behavior and speech that challenges its authority, this should be cause for alarm across the entire political spectrum.
Here’s the point: you don’t have to like Trump or any of the others who are being muzzled, nor do you have to agree or even sympathize with their views, but to ignore the long-term ramifications of such censorship would be dangerously naïve.
In other words, whatever powers you allow the government and its corporate operatives to claim now, for the sake of the greater good or because you like or trust those in charge, will eventually be abused and used against you by tyrants of your own making.
The glaring fallacy that always lies at the heart of pro-censorship sentiments is the gullible, delusional belief that censorship powers will be deployed only to suppress views one dislikes, but never one’s own views… Facebook is not some benevolent, kind, compassionate parent or a subversive, radical actor who is going to police our discourse in order to protect the weak and marginalized or serve as a noble check on mischief by the powerful. They are almost always going to do exactly the opposite: protect the powerful from those who seek to undermine elite institutions and reject their orthodoxies. Tech giants, like all corporations, are required by law to have one overriding objective: maximizing shareholder value. They are always going to use their power to appease those they perceive wield the greatest political and economic power.
Welcome to the age of technofascism.
Clothed in tyrannical self-righteousness, technofascism is powered by technological behemoths (both corporate and governmental) working in tandem to achieve a common goal.
Thus far, the tech giants have been able to sidestep the First Amendment by virtue of their non-governmental status, but it’s a dubious distinction at best. Certainly, Facebook and Twitter have become the modern-day equivalents of public squares, traditional free speech forums, with the internet itself serving as a public utility.
When given a choice, the government always goes for the option that expands its powers at the expense of the citizenry’s. Moreover, when it comes to free speech activities, regulation is just another word for censorship.
Right now, it’s trendy and politically expedient to denounce, silence, shout down and shame anyone whose views challenge the prevailing norms, so the tech giants are lining up to appease their shareholders.
This is the tyranny of the majority against the minority—exactly the menace to free speech that James Madison sought to prevent when he drafted the First Amendment to the Constitution—marching in lockstep with technofascism.
With intolerance as the new scarlet letter of our day, we now find ourselves ruled by the mob.
Those who dare to voice an opinion or use a taboo word or image that runs counter to the accepted norms are first in line to be shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes” and banished from society.
For example, a professor at Duquesne University was fired for using the N-word in an academic context. To get his job back, Gary Shank will have to go through diversity training and restructure his lesson plans.
This is what passes for academic freedom in America today.
If Americans don’t vociferously defend the right of a minority of one to subscribe to, let alone voice, ideas and opinions that may be offensive, hateful, intolerant or merely different, then we’re going to soon find that we have no rights whatsoever (to speak, assemble, agree, disagree, protest, opt in, opt out, or forge our own paths as individuals).
No matter what our numbers might be, no matter what our views might be, no matter what party we might belong to, it will not be long before “we the people” constitute a powerless minority in the eyes of a power-fueled fascist state driven to maintain its power at all costs.
We are almost at that point now.
The steady, pervasive censorship creep that is being inflicted on us by corporate tech giants with the blessing of the powers-that-be threatens to bring about a restructuring of reality straight out of Orwell’s 1984, where the Ministry of Truth polices speech and ensures that facts conform to whatever version of reality the government propagandists embrace.
Orwell intended 1984 as a warning. Instead, it is being used as a dystopian instruction manual for socially engineering a populace that is compliant, conformist and obedient to Big Brother.
Censorship power, like the tech giants who now wield it, is an instrument of status quo preservation. The promise of the internet from the start was that it would be a tool of liberation, of egalitarianism, by permitting those without money and power to compete on fair terms in the information war with the most powerful governments and corporations. But just as is true of allowing the internet to be converted into a tool of coercion and mass surveillance, nothing guts that promise, that potential, like empowering corporate overlords and unaccountable monopolists to regulate and suppress what can be heard.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, these internet censors are not acting in our best interests to protect us from dangerous, disinformation campaigns. They’re laying the groundwork to preempt any “dangerous” ideas that might challenge the power elite’s stranglehold over our lives.
Therefore, it is important to recognize the thought prison that is being built around us for what it is: a prison with only one route of escape—free thinking and free speaking in the face of tyranny.
Travelers Entering UK Must Pay to Quarantine in Gov-Sanctioned Hotel for 10 Days
As of Monday, travelers arriving in the United Kingdom from one of thirty-three “red list” countries are being ordered to quarantine in a government-sanctioned hotel for over a week or face a large fine.
Those travelers coming in from any country on the government’s new “red list” must also pre-book and pay £1,750 ($2,120) to stay in the sanctioned hotel, an order which amounts to a large tax burden on travelers and will likely be another blow to the desperately struggling travel industry. The cost will cover the room, testing and transport, according to the BBC.
The additional rates for one extra adult or a child aged over 12 is £650 ($788), and for a child aged five to 12 it is £325 ($394).
If the quarantine order is broken, the government is ready to issue a £10,000 ($12,114.90) fine.
If a traveler is found to be lying about where they are coming from, they will also face a £10,000 fine and potentially up to ten years in prison.
Upon arriving, travelers coming from a listed country will be escorted by government-contracted security guards to a bus which will take them to isolation.
Image Credit: PA MEDIA. / https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56064759
A woman gestures to members of the media while quarantined
at Radisson Blu Edwardian Hotel at Heathrow Airport
The government’s red list includes Portugal, South Africa, Ecuador, Venezuela, and the United Arab Emirates.
The new restrictions are coming into play over health official concern of new strains of COVID-19.
The travel sector has warned that the crackdown has hit the industry in what would normally be the busy half-term week as well as a crucial time for summer bookings.
“The industry simply cannot afford to wait until everyone in the UK is vaccinated before people start to travel again — otherwise insolvencies and redundancies will be inevitable,” ABTA, the trade association for the travel industry, said.
Figures released by the Office for National Statistics on Friday showed that economic output of travel agents and tour operators fell 86 per cent in December 2020 compared with February 2020, while air transport output fell 89 per cent.
Heathrow Airport CEO John Holland-Kaye said in a statement last week that Britain’s new measures are “essentially a border closure that will inevitably delay the country’s recovery and hurt the UK’s supply chains.”
“The world is more locked down today than at virtually any point in the past 12 months and passengers face a bewildering array of rapidly changing and globally uncoordinated travel restrictions,” International Air Transport Association (IATA) CEO Alexandre de Juniac said in a statement this month, adding that airlines would need continued government financial support to stay afloat.
According to the IATA, if the over-the-top travel restrictions stay in place, international passenger demand could only amount to 38% of that seen in 2019. Demand in 2020 only covered a quarter of 2019 demand.
As CNN notes, “It’s not just airlines at stake. Thousands of companies rely on travel and tourism to earn an income. These firms employed 330 million people globally in 2019, according to the World Travel and Tourism Council. The industry body estimates more than half of these workers have been laid off or are currently on furlough.”
“As soon as possible in the coming weeks, we will be introducing mandatory PCR testing at the airport for people returning to Canada. Travelers will then have to wait up to 3 days at an approved hotel for their test results at their own expense, which is expected to be more than $2,000. Those with negative test results will then be able to quarantine at home under significantly increased surveillance and enforcement. Those with positive tests will be immediately required to quarantine in designated government facilities to make sure they are not carrying variants of potential concern.”
~ Justin Trudeau, Canadian Prime Minister—Excerpt from: Vaccine Update January 29, 2021.
Draconian does not fully describe the actions that are being taken by the state in this mass assault on the citizenry due to a non-existent ‘virus pandemic’ that is being used as a government false flag operation in order to gain total control of the people. This is not only an abomination, it is criminal evil prosecuted by the state without any regard of the people.
The opening quote is from our northern neighbor, which has become nothing less than a communist country, but the mandates there concerning travel while now slightly more severe, are somewhat mild compared to what is planned here in the U.S. Americans already face mandatory ‘Covid’ testing when returning to this country, but it is getting worse every day, and plans to increase the tyranny to unheard of levels is already in the works. The controlled tyrant Biden is actively pursuing these same oppressive measures for domestic travel, which would be little different than being in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia in the past. Even if ‘vaccinated’ with the deadly and poisonous gene-altering m-RNA concoction, you will still not be exempt, and will have to be tested. But after taking the toxic GMO ‘Covid’ shot, you will have been injected with any number of viruses, which would trigger a positive result from testing. How convenient for the state rulers. If the American people allow this to go forward, they will deserve the fate that they brought on themselves by their pathetic unwillingness to fight for their own freedom.
Those that have been mistakenly labeled as conspiracy theorists for so many years have now become the most prolific prognosticators of truth in this fake ‘democratic’ system that is based only on lies and deceit. Most everything considered a ‘conspiracy’ in the past is now happening in open sight. Government lockdown facilities, or quarantine centers, are not only available, but are being actively built and will be used to hold those deemed a threat by the state against their will, and this is just the beginning. Carrying papers is now becoming mandatory, and special state passports for any and every act of movement are now on the verge of being required. Martial law, especially medical martial law, has not only been implemented, but is the norm. Mass surveillance at levels never even imaged only a few years ago is now in place, with tracking and tracing required in many instances, and monitoring protocols, including carry, wearable, and injectable devices being actively developed and used. Decreed requirements of restriction in order to simply be able to function normally, to move about, to work, to enter most public areas, and to travel, are now in place, and getting more heavy-handed every day. Our lives have been stolen, and our liberty completely destroyed in the name of a fake government devised ‘emergency.’
This is but a very short list of all the things that have been warned about for many years by those of us willing to tell the truth and expose the state for what it really is, but few have had the good sense to listen and pay attention. While the herd continued to ridicule and attempt to marginalize those honest and courageous citizens willing to seek out and tell the truth in the face of extreme prejudice, all their freedoms were taken from them, and now they risk the loss of everything they ever held dear. The most tragic aspect of this is that most have voluntarily accepted their fate as unimportant slaves in a collectivist system of ruling domination, and in many cases without regret.
In the course of this incredible transition from ‘basic’ freedom to almost total bondage, the bulk of society not only went along without resistance, but also actually helped their malevolent captors by assisting them in their plot. They reacted with spontaneous acceptance each and every step of the way. They even became agents for their own state incarcerators in order to help advance this heinous takeover scheme. Only blind indifference paired with complete ignorance could explain such behavior, and while this attitude has been successfully taught through state training and indoctrination methods over decades, it still boggles the mind that so many would tolerate their own destruction and enslavement at the hands of these falsely claimed ‘rulers that are nothing but psychopathic monsters.
It appears obvious that total dissent and disobedience by large numbers to any government mandate is necessary in order to throw off the chains of tyranny that have been established by the ‘ruling’ system. The most important first steps are to immediately eliminate masks, refuse to distance in any way whatsoever, and to refuse to be injected with this fraudulent devil’s brew called a ‘vaccine.’ Wearing masks do not protect anyone from anything, but masks take away all expression and humanity. Distancing by avoiding human contact disallows communal thought, conversation, communication, and debate of issues. This is what your accepted masters desire. The ‘vaccine’ is not a vaccine, but is a way of injecting a computer-like operating system into your body and mind, so that many will die, and the rest can be controlled due to this artificial transformation from human to transhuman.
There are many other risks and problems to solve, but by first addressing these three key agenda items meant only to establish compliance, to create anonymity, to stop all connection and discussion, and to alter humanity physically and mentally into a more manageable crop, we can gain control of this brutal takeover and planned reset. Once that occurs, the rest will fall into place, and with time, we can gain back our freedom, and begin to live life once again.
To hell with the claimed ruling ‘elite,’ to hell with this government, and any that wish to steal our freedom, our families, and our very lives!
“Destroyers, are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them. Where there is still a people, there the state is not understood, but hated as the evil eye, and as sin against laws and customs. This sign I give unto you: every people speaketh its language of good and evil: this its neighbour understandeth not. Its language hath it devised for itself in laws and customs. But the state lieth in all languages of good and evil; and whatever it saith it lieth; and whatever it hath it hath stolen. False is everything in it; with stolen teeth it biteth, the biting one. False are even its bowels.” ~ Thus Spake Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche
Germany Hired Koch Institute and Other Scientists to Justify Unconstitutional Lockdowns: Die Welt
One of Germany’s largest newspapers, Die Welt, has obtained evidence that the Interior Ministry hired scientists from the Robert Koch institute and several universities to justify the country’s strict lockdown measures.
The documents – more than 200 pages which were recovered after a legal battle with the Koch Institute, reveal internal correspondence between the Ministry of the Interior and the researchers.
In one exchange, State Secretary Markus Kerber asks the researchers to develop a model on which to base “preventative and repressive measures.”
In just four days, scientists working in close coordination with the ministry developed a working paper in secret, which described a “worst-case scenario” in which over one million people in German could die of COVID-19 if social life were to continue as it was before the pandemic.
Based on the dire projections, the German state responded with sweeping legislative changes to longstanding laws to enact strict measures – including unprecedented lockdowns that began in March. This triggered a flurry of lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the measures, ranging from lost income to isolation of the elderly, to mandating that people remain in their homes and avoid public places in violation of “fundamental rights of personal freedom.”
Meanwhile, German courts have been ruling against the restrictions.
In one case, a court granted interim relief after plaintiffs say the city of Gießen illegally prohibited a protest, despite detailed social distancing precautions outlined by organizers. The court held that the city’s ban violated the freedom of assembly, and that legal changes instituted in March do not apply to open-air assemblies.
In a second case regarding a COVID-19 protest in Stuttgart, the city was found in violation of the law when it told the organizer that it could not process requests to hold mass gatherings due to pandemic restrictions. Eventually a Constitutional Court held that the city similarly violated freedom of assembly.
And in a third case, Muslims petitioning to hold prayers at a mosque during Ramadan amid Lower Saxony’s strict ban on religious gatherings was overturned by the high administrative court (Oberverwaltungsgericht), which – while refusing to open all mosques – noted that infection risk depended on several details, and that a blanket ban was inappropriate.
In January, a German court in Weimar declared the prohibition on social contact unlawful and contrary to German Basic Law (Gründgesetz), finding the lockdown laws “unconstitutional because the Infection Protection Act was not a sufficient legal basis for such a far-reaching regulation as a contact ban,” according to the UK Human Rights Blog.
In this case a citizen of Weimar had been prosecuted and was to be fined €200 for celebrating his birthday together with seven other people in the courtyard of a house at the end of April 2020, thus violating the contact requirements in force at the time. This only allowed members of two households to be together. The judge’s conclusion was that the Corona Ordinance was unconstitutional and materially objectionable.
This is the first time a judge has dealt in detail with the medical facts, the economic consequences and the effects of the specific policy brought about by the Coronavirus pandemic…
In short, German officials paid the Koch Institute and others to produce dire pandemic models, which they then used to enact unconstitutional laws which are now being overturned by the courts.
In this article, I present four brief conversations—-
ONE: “Hello, Vaccine Airlines. What is your destination?”
“I’m flying from Newark to Chicago.”
“Have you received the COVID-19 vaccine?”
“Of course.”
“Can you prove it?”
“How would I do that?”
“Do you have the Stasi App on your cell phone?”
“No.”
“I’m sorry. Until you do, and it indicates you’re vaccinated, you can’t fly with us.”
“I just want to buy your product.”
“Impossible. You must satisfy certain conditions before we allow you to buy it.”
TWO: Hello, Jewish Airlines. What is your destination?”
“I’m flying from Miami to New Orleans.”
“Are you Jewish?”
“Of course.”
“Can you prove it?”
“How would I do that?”
“You need the Moses App on your cell phone.”
“I don’t have a cell phone.”
“Then, as far as we’re concerned, you aren’t Jewish. You can’t fly with us.”
THREE: “Hello, Islamic Airlines. What is your destination?”
“I’m flying from New York to Cincinnati.”
“Do you practice the Islamic Faith?”
“Sure.”
“Can you prove it? We have a Central Registry. They do background checks.”
“You won’t take my word?”
“No.”
FOUR: “This is ridiculous. Vaccination isn’t in the same category as religious membership.”
“If I offered to show you evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine is ineffective and dangerous, would you examine that evidence?”
“Of course not.”
“Why not?”
“Because, first of all, social media are censoring that kind of ‘information,’ so I know it’s bogus. And second, all experts agree that vaccination is greatest medical discovery in history.”
“What if they’re wrong?”
“They can’t be wrong.”
“Why not?”
“Because if they were, Reality itself would be turned upside down, and we would all be living in some kind of fantasy.”
“That’s your bottom line?”
“Yes.”
There is another carrier called Trans Airlines. They only allow transgender persons to fly, but that is a much longer conversation, and I leave it to you to write it…
Keep this in mind. Months ago, the US Department of Health and Human Services issued a declaration stating that NO LIABILITY could be attached to any person who participates in medical counter-measures against SARS-CoV-2 [1] [2]. Therefore, it appears that, if a person takes the COVID vaccine, in order to fly (given airlines’ emerging demands), and suffers grave injury or dies from the shot, there will be no legal recourse.
The exception is a new “COVID vaccine court” set up by the federal government [3]. The complaining party pleads his case before a panel. However, I assume that convincing these judges a loved one died as a result of the vaccine, and not “another underlying condition,” will be a very tall mountain to climb.
Here is one more conversation that might interest you:
“Hello, Vaccine Airlines. What is your destination?”
“I want to book a flight, but I’m not taking the COVID vaccine. I’d like to speak with a person who’ll listen to my reasons for turning down the shot.”
“Certainly. Just a moment. I’ll transfer your call.”
“Hello, I’m Agent Martin, FBI Division of Domestic Terrorism. This call is being recorded. How can I help you?”
Sometimes, especially these days when the average American is completely asleep and indifferent to the totalitarian takeover of this country, reality is so obvious as to border on the insane. I am not discussing the idiotic Trump or Biden argument, as believing in a master is simply a way to remain a slave. The political system in this country is an atrocity, no different than it has been over at least the last century. We are staring at total tyranny that has been incrementally established by this evil governing system over the past 240 years. This was by design, but it has been fast-tracked at lightening speed over this past year, and now the final push toward global technocratic rule is firmly in place.
One look at the U.S. Capital in Washington D.C. should be enough for anyone, even those with only a modicum of intelligence, to finally understand that this country is a fascist oligarchy on its way to becoming a dictatorial Communistic technocracy. Miles and miles of extreme steel and concrete supported fencing with razor wire has been erected around the entire Capital grounds and all its government buildings. This fence looks to be 12 feet high in places, and 8 feet high around the perimeter. This is very disturbing, as it looks little different than the fencing surrounding North Korea.
This wall is secured with heavy concrete and steel with steel supports deep into the ground. This is a serious fence, and something that would only be seen in a country run by a dictatorial regime scared of its own people. It is guarded by heavily armed military personnel, and manned 24 hours a day. Heavy equipment, trucks, and armored vehicles are present around this fortress, all so the politicians can be secure from the people that elected them.
This wall was put up almost overnight with very expensive and state of the art materials. This had to be planned long in advance, and the materials had to be secured, stored, and ready to ship, and then build, in a very short amount of time. What this indicates is that everything that has taken place was also planned well before anything happened at the staged presidential selection on January 6th. This was not done for any worthless inauguration.
Everything the government does is by design, and has been discussed and plotted long before any event takes place. Nothing is natural or responsive, it is simply a plot. This was no different. Understanding that this is so, and then seeing this in action should alarm every single citizen. This was done for a reason because the ruling class knows what is coming, and they expect this apathetic population to be too stupid, or too concerned about a fake virus to recognize it in time. Why else would they want to protect themselves from the people they pretend to represent with such extreme measures?
It is my opinion that this is telegraphing that something of epoch proportion is going to happen. They are not afraid of a riot, they are afraid of an uprising. Since the people have done almost nothing so far to protect their own freedom, what is coming that could cause that to change? What does this heinous government know that we do not?
When a country’s Capital looks like it is preparing for war, it probably is. Are they planning a war against foreign forces, or are they planning a war at home? That fence will not protect them from bombs, it can only keep out this citizenry. Something sinister is at hand. Is martial law on the horizon? Is it a biowarfare attack? Are real toxic pathogens about to be released on the public? Or do they understand that the coming policies that they plan to implement will ignite a civil war? This is a sign, and it should not be ignored!
Senator Joe Manchin wants to bring DHS’s spy on your neighbors “If You See, Something Say Something” program to social media, blogs, websites, and much more. Manchin’s bill, the “See Something, Say Something Online Act” would essentially turn social media users into Federal spies by forcing them to report suspicious people to law enforcement.
Just how bad is this bill?
This bill would essentially force anyone on social media to report suspicious “transmissions” to law enforcement.
“Known Suspicious Transmission.—The term ‘‘known suspicious transmission’’ is any suspicious transmission that an interactive computer service should have reasonably known to have occurred or have been notified of by a director, officer, employ, agent, interactive computer service user, or State or Federal law enforcement agency.”
Major Crime —The term ‘‘major crime’’ means a Federal criminal offense that is a crime of violence (as defined 13 in section 16 of title 18, United States Code); relating to domestic or international terrorism (as those terms are defined in section 16 2331 of title 18, United States Code)
What exactly is a known suspicious transmission or major crime?
“Suspicious Transmission is defined as any post, private message, comment, tag, transaction, or any other user-generated content or transmission that government officials later determine commits, facilitates, incites, promotes, or otherwise assists the commission of a major crime. Major crimes are defined as anything involving violence, domestic, or international terrorism, or a serious drug offense.”
How could social media users, bloggers, web forum moderators, web conferencing users etc., know that a comment left or uttered by someone would later lead to them committing a major crime?
The See Something, Say Something Online Act would force social media users into red flagging every person’s comments just in case someone commits a major crime in the future.
This bill would effectively destroy the First Amendment as we know it, dispelling any vestiges of America still being a free country.
Social media users would be forced to submit a Suspicious Transmission Activity Report (STAR) on suspicious individuals within 30 days.
“In General.—If a provider of an interactive computer service detects a suspicious transmission, the interactive computer service, including any director, officer, employee, agent, or representative of such provider, shall submit to the Department a STAR describing the suspicious transmission in accordance with this section.”
As Reasonwarned, the See Something, Say Something Online Act would put reporting on your fellow American on steroids. It would create a glut of frivolous reports, including many that are politically motivated, or otherwise disingenuous.
Social media users and law enforcement would keep detailed personal information, including metadata of suspicious people for five years.
“Each STAR submitted under this section shall contain, at a minimum— (1) the name, location, and other such identification information as submitted by the user to the provider of the interactive computer service; (2) the date and nature of the post, message, comment, tag, transaction, or other user-generated content or transmission detected for suspicious activity such as time, origin, and destination; and (3) any relevant text, information, and metadata related to the suspicious transmission.”
“Retention Of Records —Each provider of an interactive computer service shall— (A) maintain a copy of any STAR submitted under this section and the original record equivalent of any supporting documentation for the 5-year period beginning on the date on which the STAR was submitted. (B) make all supporting documentation available to the Department and any appropriate law enforcement agencies upon request.”
No one can tell a person that they have been flagged as suspicious
“Non-Disclosure—Except as otherwise prescribed by the Attorney General, no provider of an interactive computer service, or officer, director, employee, or agent of such a provider, subject to an order under subsection (a) may disclose the existence of, or terms of, the order to any person.”
Social media users could face prosecution for not reporting suspicious people
Imagine someone leaving a comment on social media like the police suck or calling someone a bitch, twit or twat and then they go on to commit a crime in the future. Would anyone like to guess what might happen next?
Every social media user who refused to file a STAR report on a suspicious person would open themselves up to prosecution or a lawsuit.
“Compliance—Any provider of an interactive computer service that fails to report a known suspicious transmission shall not be immune from civil or criminal liability for such transmission under section 230(c) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(c)).”
Where does one begin when it comes to describing just how bad this bill is?
Forcing social media users to essentially submit STAR reports on people they deem as suspicious opens up a Pandora’s box of problems.
Social media users who are forced into reporting on people could flag everyone’s comments to guard against being prosecuted or sued. This bill, if passed as it is written, would have a devastating effect on the civil rights and freedoms of every American.
A LANDMARK legal decision declared that regional containment policies – including lockdowns, social distancing, prohibitions on gatherings by family or friends are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The judge called the lockdowns a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives.”
The judge ruled that the government violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” under basic German law. This momentous, affirmative, liberating decision was handed down by a court of law in Weimar, Germany; the city whose name was adopted by the first German republic: 1919—1933, until it was overturned by the Nazi regime. Hundreds of thousands of German people have demonstrated throughout the summer and fall of 2020, some protesters compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance; which led Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to bristle.
Forensic analysis of official data convinced the court that the epidemic situation that was used to justify the lockdown laws does not exist. The judge ruled that the government lacked sufficient legal grounds to impose the restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance.” He declared that the measures were an attack on the “foundations of our society.”
Dr. Reiner Fuellisch
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the lawyer who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures stated:
“We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration.”
The battle over government dictatorial overreach and the assault on the rights and dignity of citizens in a democracy will be won in the courts of law.
The decision has been described by German media as “politically explosive”!
Below Dr. Nicole Delépine, MD, provides an in-depth analysis of the body of evidence that supports this momentous decision. She notes that one factor that helped Germany resist the epidemic better than other countries – such as France – is probably due to the early treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics, vitamins, etc. She concludes that This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
* Dr. Delépine is a member of the Distinguished Advisory Board of the Alliance for Human Research Protection.
Nicole Delepine, MD
After PCR tests, the principle of confinement condemned by justice. Published on 1/26/2021 3:50 PM
German court declares regional lockdown UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision
Author (s): Nicole Delépine for FranceSoir
Tribune: German court declares regional containment UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision [1]
Will Weimar again be the site of legal revolutions as at the time when the constitution ending the empire was drawn up after the First World War? [2] In any case, the judgment declaring confinement unconstitutional caused a stir in Germany and gave rise to several articles. Let us hope that it will also awaken French consciences, giving them the courage to take legal action against these liberticidal and unjustified measures inspired by the WHO which guides our governments [3] and promises them financial aid via the IMF like the President of Belarus has clearly stated [4] .
The Weimar judgment considered major
The social distancing rules imposed by the Thuringian government are deemed incompatible with the country’s Constitution. Thanks to forensic analysis of official data, the judgment affirms that the epidemic situation used to justify the law does not exist. The lawyer Reiner Fuellmich who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures comments as follows [5] : “ We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration . ”
Story
On the occasion of a judgment of a man having according to the accusation “violated” (here is a very big word), the strict confinement imposed by the government of the central state of Thuringia last spring, the legality of the measures imposed in Germany to curb an epidemic of questionable severity is back in the headlines. This is all the more interesting given that some countries, including ours talk about containment while the epidemic is stagnating or decreasing, that there are effective early treatments and that the overwhelming majority of hospitals are not full, contrary to what our authorities announce here and there.
Facts
This gentleman had celebrated a birthday with his seven [6] friends. On 24.04.2020, the person concerned was in the evening with at least seven other people in the backyard of the house X-Straße 1 in W. to celebrate the birthday of one of the participants. The eight participants in total were distributed among seven different households. However, a stay in public space is only authorized alone, in the circle of members of his own household and, moreover, at most with another non-domestic person ”according to local regulations.
The Weimar judge condemned a restriction limiting private gatherings to members of the same household and to a person outside of the same household, a rule which the accused had not respected. The judge said that the regional government itself had violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” guaranteed by Article 1 of the German Basic Law by imposing such restrictions.
The accused was acquitted and relieved of the need to pay a fine of 200 euros ($ 243).
No sufficient reason for confinement
According to the court, the government did not have sufficient grounds to impose these restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance” at the time and the health system was not at risk of failure. collapse, the Robert Koch Institute having reported that the multiplication coefficient of Covid-19 had then fallen below 1.
At no time is there any real danger that the health service will be overwhelmed by a “wave” of patients with COVID-19. According to the register established on March 17, 2020, an average of at least 40% of intensive care beds in Germany were permanently available. In Thuringia, 378 beds were registered occupied on April 3, 36 of which were in covid-19 patients. During this time, there were 417 vacant beds. On April 16, two days before the publication of the regulation, 501 beds were recorded occupied, 56 covid-19, and 528 beds were vacant … Thuringia recorded its highest number of covid-19 patients notified in the spring at 63 (April 28). Thus, at no time has the number of patients with COVID-19 reached a level that could have justified fears of an overflow of the health system.
This estimate of the real dangers of COVID-19 in spring 2020 is confirmed by an assessment of data from 421 clinics belonging to the Qualitätsmedizin Initiative, which found that the number of cases of acute respiratory infections (severe ARI) hospitalized in Germany in first half of 2020 was 187,174 – lower than the figure for the first half of 2019 (221,841 cases), even though that figure included cases of ARI caused by covid. The same analysis showed that the number of cases in intensive care was lower in the first half of 2020 than in 2019 …
The judge also said that the regional government did not have the right to introduce such far-reaching measures since it was for the legislator to do so (parliament and not district courts).
The Weimar court said the spring containment of Thuringia was a “catastrophically flawed policy decision, with dramatic consequences for almost every area of people’s lives . ” [7]
Health situation and confinement: disproportionate decision
The confinement imposed in Thuringia represents “the most complete and deepest restrictions on fundamental rights in the history of the Federal Republic, ” the court said, calling these measures a ” disproportionate ” attack against the ” foundations of our society. ”
Consequences of a regional ordinance
The decision is not legally binding outside of Weimar, although each German court can render a judgment on the constitutionality of orders issued by any authority other than the Bundestag, federal parliament or regional parliament. Unless a law has been passed, each court can contradict the regulations if they appear unjustified
Impact of the Weimar judgment among some officials and local media
Like the other countries submitted to the WHO’s international health council, containment measures are regularly re-imposed, and clearly unrelated to the virulence of the epidemic, which varies depending on the region, but faithfully following Ferguson’s scheme, which had been planned in March 2020 (report 9) the succession of six confinements, in order to be able to move on to the major reset planned by the economic and world forum in Davos (read Klaus Schwab’s brief available on the internet of the same name ). This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
Germany is once again applying strict containment quite similar to that imposed by the federal government in November and which has been extended and reinforced several times since then [8] . Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet extended the restrictions until mid-February.
Neil Ferguson Dire Prediction
Appeal of the region against the judgment of the Weimar court
The Thuringian Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office lodged a complaint against the court decision, requesting that it be reconsidered and possibly overturned, with the case being handed over to another judge. The judgment must be “revised to develop the law and ensure a unified jurisdiction” regarding the containment and its violation, a spokesperson for the prosecutor’s office, Hannes Gruenseisen, told local media.
Containment is going badly in Germany, especially since the country has resisted the epidemic much better than France, probably due to the early and discreet treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and vitamins, etc., from the start, isolation patients, and consequently suffers [9] a lower mortality rate (622 / million at 26/1, according to the WHO. France on the contrary has prohibited early treatment and practiced so-called blind confinement because mixing patients and healthy leading to an explosion of direct (1113 / M) and indirect mortality due to lack of care and other complications of confinement.
Comparison of Mortality — France vs Germany
Germany has seen protests against this measure on several occasions in various cities during the fall and winter of 2020. At one point, protesters even compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance, which did not go over well with Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.
Rationale for quashing the charge
The person concerned had to be acquitted for legal reasons because the articles on which the accusation was based are unconstitutional and therefore canceled. [10]
The court itself decided on the constitutionality of the norms, since the obligation of submission according to the consistent case law of the Federal Constitutional Court applies only to official federal and state laws, but not to district statutory orders.
The judge concluded that there were no “unacceptable gaps in protection” that could have justified resorting to general regulations. These measures “violate the inviolable guaranteed human dignity” in article 1, paragraph 1 of the Federal Constitution. “
“Devastating accusation against the federal government .
It is striking how coldly Judge Weimar concluded this months-long discussion: the blanket contact ban is a harsh civil rights intervention. It is part of the fundamental freedoms of the individual in a free society to determine for himself with whom (on presumption of consent) and under what circumstances he or she will come into contact.
The free encounter between people for all conceivable ends is also a fundamental basis for society.
The state’s obligation in this case is categorically to refrain from any intervention that deliberately regulates and limits that measure. Questions of how many people a citizen can invite to their home or how many people a citizen can meet in a public place to walk, play sports, run errands or sit on a park bench have absolutely no legitimate interest for the state.
By imposing a blanket ban on contact,the state – albeit with good intentions – attacks the foundations of society by imposing physical distance between citizens (“social distancing”).
No one, even in January 2020, could have imagined, in Germany, to be prevented by the state under penalty of a fine from inviting their parents to their home without banning other members of their family from the house, while that they were there. No one could have imagined that it would be forbidden to sit with three friends on a park bench. Never before in Germany had the state had the idea of imposing such measures to counter an epidemic.
Even the 2013 risk analysis “Pandemic caused by the SARS-like virus” (Bundestag publication 17/12051), which described a scenario of 7.5 million deaths in 3 years, does not consider a general ban on contacts (or ban on leaving home or general suspension of public life). Besides the quarantine and isolation of infected people, the only anti-epidemic measures he speaks of are the closure of schools, the cancellation of mass events and the question of hygiene recommendations (BT 17/12051, p . 61f).
“Although it appears that a shift in values has taken place over the months of the Covid crisis, with the consequence that many people find procedures once considered absolutely exceptional more or less ‘normal’ – which, of course, also changes the outlook on the Constitution – there is no doubt that by imposing a blanket contact ban, the democratic parliament has broken what was previously considered an obvious taboo.
“It should also be noted – as an aspect worthy of special attention – that the state, by imposing its general ban on contact in order to protect itself against infection, treats every citizen as a potential health threat. of third parties. If every citizen is seen as a threat from which others must be protected, that citizen is also deprived of the possibility of deciding what risks to take – which is a fundamental freedom.
A citizen’s choice to visit a cafe or bar at night and run the risk of respiratory infection in the name of social interaction and fun in life, or to exercise caution because he has a weakened immune system and therefore prefers to stay at home, is suppressed under the provisions of a general contact ban. “
The report then details the judge’s examination of the collateral damage caused by the confinement.
– Declines in profits, losses suffered by companies, traders and independent professionals as direct consequences of the restrictions imposed on their freedoms. Losses for suppliers of directly affected companies; losses resulting from disruption of supply chains leading to production stoppages; losses resulting from travel restrictions.
-Wage losses due to reduced hours or unemployment
– Bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods and consequent costs of bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods ”.
For Berlin, the Senate administration reported a 23% increase in child abuse for the first half of 2020 [12] .
According to a representative survey (Steinert / Ebert), during the spring confinement period, around 3 percent of women in Germany were victims of physical violence at home, 3.6 percent were raped by their partner, and in 6 , 5 percent of all children’s homes were severely punished.
The number of statistically recorded suicides in Germany is not yet available for 2020, but the Senate administration in Berlin has reported a potentially significant increase in the number of suicides.
During the spring containment, more than 908,000 operations were canceled in Germany, not only so-called non-emergency operations, such as implantation of knee and hip joint prostheses, knee arthroscopy, cataract surgeries, etc., but also 52,000 cancer operations. [13]
According to a meta-analysis published (British Medical Journal) in November [14] this delay already increases the risk of death by 6 to 13% depending on the type of cancer, an eight week delay for breast cancer of 13%, a twelve-week deferral of 26 percent. Without being able to quantify in more detail, there is no doubt that the cancellation of the operations also resulted in deaths in Germany.
A study conducted by the Clinique du Haut-Rhin Waldshut-Tiengen [15] examined excess mortality in the district of Waldshut (170,000 inhabitants) in April 2020. On average, 165 people died there between 2016 and 2019 in April, compared to 227. in 2020, an excess mortality of 37%. Of the 62 additional deaths, only 34 could be associated with covid19, 28, or 45% of excess mortality are due to other causes of death . The study authors attribute these cases to reduced use of emergency medical facilities. Twice as many people have been found dead in their homes than the comparative average. These figures indicate that deaths are due to underutilization or delay in the use of health care.
Short, medium and long term damages were pointed out by the court
(1) Loss of schooling, teaching and impairment of psychosocial development of children due to failure or restrictions of school education or closure of other educational institutions
(2) Loss of cultural suggestions or experiences due to the closure of theaters, concert halls or opera houses and many other cultural institutions
(3) Loss of possibilities for artistic development by prohibitions which prohibit common music in orchestras or choirs.
(4) loss of community experiences / personal social cohabitation by banning meetings in associations, demonstrations, gatherings, closing bars, etc.
(5) Reduction of social development opportunities for children by closing kindergartens
(6) Isolation of children in accommodation without contact with other children by closing schools, kindergartens and play areas
The judgment report emphasizes that school is not only a place for the transmission of knowledge, but a place of social learning. School closures virtually suppress social learning and hinder the integration of children and young people.
Teaching by parents is difficult, particularly in certain disadvantaged areas. The social divide is therefore reinforced. The learning of German among children of migrant families is also seriously disrupted. “Knowledge of German? Catastrophic for a third of the pupils [16] .
Economic consequences of containment According to the Weimar judgment, we note
“(1) Aid provided by the Federal State and the Länder to economic agents
(2) Tax losses due to the limitation of economic activity due to confinement
(3) Partial unemployment benefits and unemployment benefits that had to be paid following confinement
(4) Social assistance for people dependent on social assistance
The “coronavirus shield”, a legislative package adopted on March 27, 2020, in Germany alone represented 1.173 billion euros (353.3 billion euros in aid, 819.7 billion euros in guarantees). The latest federal budgets were 356.4 billion euros (2019) and 346.6 billion euros (2018). Even if the guarantees provided are not per se “lost”, the overall charges are expected to reach the aggregate level of several federal budgets.
Health and economic damage in southern countries secondary to confinements in rich western countries
The collateral damage already occurred or to be expected is enormous. The reasons are the interruption of tuberculosis control programs, childhood disease immunization programs, interruptions in food supply due to collapsed supply chains, etc.
The UN predicts the famine of more than 10,000 children per month during the first year of the pandemic (more than 10,000 children die of hunger each month due to covid19 [17]
In Africa alone, according to Federal Development Minister Müller,400,000 additional victims are expected from malaria and HIV and half a million deaths from tuberculosis as a result of confinement (more victims by confinement than by virus: In Africa, crises have been dramatically worsened, according to an article by John Ioannidis [18] 1.4 million more deaths from tuberculosis are even expected over the next five years .
In the long term, containment-related excess mortality will likely be significantly larger than the death toll from COVID 19.
Since the containment policy in Thuringia is part of a general policy of almost all western industrialized countries, this damage is the indirect consequence also attributable to the pro rata and is therefore in principle linked to the examination of proportionality .
For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage.
The word ” disproportionate ” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened. The containment policy implemented by the Land government in the spring (and today again), of which the general ban on contact was (and remains) essential, is a catastrophic political error, with dramatic consequences for almost all sectors of human life, for society, for the State and for the countries of the South of the whole world ”.
Constitutionality of standards
In the case of legal ordinances which have not been adopted by the Bundestag or a regional parliament, each court is authorized to decide for itself their constitutionality. The articles cited [19] by the prosecution are not constitutional, because they are not based on a law passed in parliament.
They are unconstitutional for formal reasons, as provisions which deeply infringe on fundamental rights are not covered by the legal enabling basis in the Infection Protection Act.
The legislator must himself take all the essential decisions in fundamental normative fields, in particular in the field of the exercise of fundamental rights – insofar as this state regulation is accessible – and must not delegate them to the executive. regional.
The more essential legal regulations or other executive acts interfere with fundamental rights, the more specific the provisions of the implementing law must be.
Attack on human dignity
Thus with regard to isolation and prohibition of contact with people outside the family, a general prohibition of contact poses – at least – the question of the violation of the guarantee of human dignity.
Here the prohibition poses a problem because it constitutes a serious attack on the general freedom of action and also on the freedom of assembly, association, religion, profession and art, not only because it is addressed to all citizens, regardless of whether or not they are suspected of disease or contamination.
By prohibiting all citizens from meeting with more than one person outside the household, by prohibiting it not only in the public space, but also in freedoms in the family nucleus, the general prohibition of contact inevitably leads to other restrictions on fundamental rights.
Federal law provides that if persons suspected of disease, contamination of a communicable disease have been identified, the restriction can only be taken “to the extent necessary to prevent the spread of the disease”, the latter not being nothing more than an explicit reference to the principle of proportionality already in force.
These are only absolute minimum conditions. The law can only carry individual measures, such as the closure of (individual) seaside resorts and not a general ban on contact.
To the extent that a general contact ban can be constitutionally compliant, at least precise regulation of the organizational conditions should be required in order to concretize precisely the necessary dangerous situation, but concrete provisions would also be necessary from the point of view legal consequences.
The principle of the rule of law is the imperative of precision in legislation. Laws cannot simply impose general regulations, which would give the authorities the license to act on whims, which would amount to an arbitrary rule.
According to the Federal Infection Protection Act (API), “competent authorities” must impose “the required security measures”. Normally, this means that spreaders or those suspected of spreading infection may be placed isolated or contaminated areas closed.
The more a legal act of the executive intervenes in fundamental rights, the more the regulations of the enabling law must be PRECISE.
Intervention-intensive measures which, in themselves, require a specific regime, can only be authorized in the context of “unforeseen developments” using general clauses, this condition is not fulfilled as it stands.
Responsible local containment in proportion to the consequences in industrialized countries, linked to the proportionality test .
“There is no doubt that the number of deaths attributable to the measures of the containment policy exceeds by several times the number of deaths avoided by it. For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage”.
The word “disproportionate” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened.
[2] Nom donné au régime de l’Allemagne après la Première Guerre mondiale (1919-1933).
Née de l’effondrement du régime impérial, la première république allemande, proclamée par le social-démocrate Scheidemann à Berlin, le 9 novembre 1918, ne prend forme qu’après l’écrasement de la révolution spartakiste (novembre 1918-janvier 1919). Elle tire son nom de la ville où se réunit en février 1919 une Assemblée nationale dominée par les sociaux-démocrates et les modérés, dont les travaux aboutissent à la promulgation (août 1919) d’une Constitution qui fait de l’Allemagne un État fédéral, le Reich, composé de 17 États (Länder) autonomes, eux-mêmes représentés au Reichsrat.
Encyclopédie Larousse en ligne – République de Weimar
[4] 950 Millions d’euros lui furent promis s’il confinait son pays. Il a dit non et raconté que d’autres pays avaient refusé mais soupçonnait que les plus obéissants avaient cédé au mirage de l’argent facile.
[6] pas une rave partie à 2000 qui au passage n’a d’ailleurs pas entrainé aucune vague de malades du Covid, ni même de poussée de contaminations, ni le moindre cluster
[9] Nous n’en avons eu confirmation que très tardivement
[10] Le tribunal a décidé lui-même de la constitutionnalité des normes, car l’obligation de soumission selon l’article 100 Abs.1 GG selon la jurisprudence constante de la Cour constitutionnelle fédérale (BVerfG, arrêts du 20 mars 1952, 1 BvL 12/51, 1 BvL 15/51, 1 BvL 16/51, 1 BvL 24/51, 1 BvL 28/51) s’applique uniquement aux lois officielles fédérales et des États, mais pas aux ordonnances statutaires.
“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” ~ Baron de Montesquieu
A very horrendous bill was introduced recently in Congress called the “Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021.” The irony of this bill title is that it is not about preventing terrorism; it is about legalizing terrorism by the state against the citizenry. It would be more appropriately titled the U.S. Government Terrorism Authorization Act of 2021.
The motivating factor for this atrocity was said to be the recent purposely staged and intentionally allowed false-flag coup at the Capitol on January 6th. The entire situation was planned in advance to assure that Biden would be the ‘selected’ president, while the members of Congress could pretend to be fearful for their lives. The police led both legitimate and criminal protesters inside the Capitol building, allowed them to remain there, all while doing nothing but brutally murdering one innocent woman. The cowardly Congress was shuttled into safe places to hide until enough pictures and video could be taken, and enough facial recognition could be gathered so that the desired Trump supporters could be gathered up and jailed while others would walk free. This was the plot and now the scene is set. The feigned ‘indignant’ Congress got everything they wanted out of this directed production.
This non-threatening Hollywood-like creation ended peacefully of course, but was made out to be another 9/11. This minor event has been called a terrifying attack, a domestic terrorism attack, a hate crime, devastating, an experience of terror by white nationalists, and heinous violent crimes; all said to have been prosecuted by homegrown domestic terrorists made up of white supremacists, and other racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists. In other words, white people!
Co-sponsor for this tyrannical bill, Democratic Representative Brad Schneider, said this in a press release on January 20:
“Following the terrifying attack on the Capitol this month, which left five dead and many injured, the entire nation has been seized by the potential threat of more terrorist attacks in Washington and around the country. Unlike after 9/11, the threat that reared its ugly head on January 6th is from domestic terror groups and extremists, often racially-motivated violent individuals. America must be vigilant to combat those radicalized to violence, and the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act gives our government the tools to identify, monitor and thwart their illegal activities. Combatting the threat of domestic terrorism and white supremacy is not a Democratic or Republican issue, not left versus right or urban versus rural. Domestic Terrorism is an American issue, a serious threat the we can and must address together,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (IL-10).”
“I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, which we need now more than ever. In the wake of the domestic terrorist attack on our Capitol two weeks ago, it is painfully clear that the current approach to addressing the real and persistent threat posed by white nationalism and similar ideologies is not working. We must not allow hate crimes and domestic terrorism to continue unchecked. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this important and timely bill as quickly as possible,” said Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (NY-10).”
In this ridiculous press release, he used the word white, white nationalism, and white supremacist at least ten times. Democrat Vincente González from Texas said “the Domestic Terror Prevention Act is more important than ever as we work to root out and rid America of this cancer.” The cancer he is alluding to is concerning white people that either are not Democrat, are against Biden, or against this government.
This bill will be used to set up a witch-hunt for mainly white people in America, mostly white males. Half the country will be considered guilty. It will be used to destroy businesses, steal property, incarcerate those that oppose the state narrative, separate families, to censor speech at every turn, and even murder. Ex-CIA head, John Brennan, came up with a list that included as he put it, “an unholy alliance of religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.” In this planned legislation, whiteness is vilified, as the bogeymen are white supremacists, white nationalists, and supposedly those that that are guilty of ‘hate’ crimes, hate crimes being anything thought ‘offensive’ by idiot leftists, progressives, and globalists. None of this is qualified of course, and this pending bill is just as vague in its description of the targeted class. All these people and more should be silenced, “reprogrammed,” and eliminated according to those supporting this act that is nothing less than a plan to prosecute false sedition.
The list of supporters endorsing this tyrannical piece of legislation is telling to say the least. They include:
Anti-Defamation League, Arab American Institute, Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism, Human Rights Campaign, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Muslim Advocates, NAACP, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., Sikh Coalition, Southern Poverty Law Center Action Fund, and Unidos.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will gain massive additional powers, and funding, in order to monitor (surveil), investigate (spy), and prosecute (terrorize, murder, and jail) so-called cases of generally undefined “domestic terrorism.”
This legislation is a travesty, and can only lead to extreme totalitarian political policing of all that believe in freedom and that stand against the state.
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell w/ Dark Journalist: Election Aftermath, ‘Deep Events’ & the Deep State | Resemblance of the 2021 Domestic Terror Bill to the 1933 Enabling Act in Nazi Germany
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Truth Comes to Light editor’s brief synopsis of the video:
This conversation covers a wide range of topics with Dr. Joseph P. Farrell and Daniel Liszt connecting dots as they go. Here are a few of the ideas they explore. This is Part 1 or a two-part interview. When the second part becomes available, we will share it at this site.
The virtual inauguration & Biden as a complete puppet to Mr. Globaloney (global controllers)
Resemblance of the 2021 Domestic Terror Bill to the 1933 Enabling Act in Nazi Germany
‘Deep events’ & the deep state
Nuclear football within the U.S.
Geopolitical fallout
International finance
Pushback from within the states & calls for succession
‘The Plan’ narrative & the manipulation of its many spokespersons in the alternative media
Data-mining & mapping of connections between Trump supporters
The persistent attacks on Trump supporters & the idea of “concentration camps” to rehabilitate them
We are moving fast down that slippery slope to an authoritarian society in which the only opinions, ideas and speech expressed are the ones permitted by the government and its corporate cohorts.
In the wake of the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, “domestic terrorism” has become the new poster child for expanding the government’s powers at the expense of civil liberties.
Of course, “domestic terrorist” is just the latest bull’s eye phrase, to be used interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist,” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous.”
Watch and see: we are all about to become enemies of the state.
If this is a test of Joe Biden’s worthiness to head up the American police state, he seems ready.
As part of his inaugural address, President Biden pledged to confront and defeat “a rise of political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism.” Biden has also asked the Director of National Intelligence to work with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security in carrying out a “comprehensive threat assessment” of domestic terrorism. And then to keep the parallels going, there is the proposed Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021, introduced after the Jan. 6 riots, which aims to equip the government with “the tools to identify, monitor and thwart” those who could become radicalized to violence.
Don’t blink or you’ll miss the sleight of hand.
This is the tricky part of the Deep State’s con game that keeps you focused on the shell game in front of you while your wallet is being picked clean by ruffians in your midst.
It follows the same pattern as every other convenient “crisis” used by the government as an excuse to expand its powers at the citizenry’s expense and at the expense of our freedoms.
As investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald warns:
“The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting ‘terrorism’ that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This New War on Terror—one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting ‘extremists’ and ‘domestic terrorists’ among American citizens on U.S. soil—presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.”
Greenwald is referring to the USA Patriot Act, passed almost 20 years ago, which paved the way for the eradication of every vital safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.
Free speech, the right to protest, the right to challenge government wrongdoing, due process, a presumption of innocence, the right to self-defense, accountability and transparency in government, privacy, press, sovereignty, assembly, bodily integrity, representative government: all of these and more have become casualties in the government’s war on the American people, a war that has grown more pronounced since Sept. 11, 2001.
Some members of Congress get it.
In a letter opposing expansion of national security powers, a handful congressional representatives urged their colleagues not to repeat the mistakes of the past:
“While many may find comfort in increased national security powers in the wake of this attack, we must emphasize that we have been here before and we have seen where that road leads. Our history is littered with examples of initiatives sold as being necessary to fight extremism that quickly devolve into tools used for the mass violation of the human and civil rights of the American people… To expand the government’s national security powers once again at the expense of the human and civil rights of the American people would only serve to further undermine our democracy, not protect it.”
Cue the Emergency State, the government’s Machiavellian version of crisis management that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.
So you see, the issue is not whether Donald Trump or Roger Stone or MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell deserve to be banned from Twitter, even if they’re believed to be spouting misinformation, hateful ideas, or fomenting discontent.
This unilateral power to muzzle free speech represents a far greater danger than any so-called right- or left-wing extremist might pose.
The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.
Yet where many go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
Eventually, all you will really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
The groundwork has already been laid.
The trap is set.
All that is needed is the right bait.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents have been busily spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers by way of AI (artificial intelligence) now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks, all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
In other words, the burden of proof is reversed: you are guilty before you are given any chance to prove you are innocent.
Dig beneath the surface of this kind of surveillance/police state, however, and you will find that the real purpose of pre-crime is not safety but control.
Red flag gun laws merely push us that much closer towards a suspect society where everyone is potentially guilty of some crime or another and must be preemptively rendered harmless.
This is the same government that has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.
For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.
In other words, if you dare to subscribe to any views that are contrary to the government’s, you may well be suspected of being a domestic terrorist and treated accordingly.
Again, where many Americans go wrong is in naively assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or harmful in order to be flagged and targeted for some form of intervention or detention.
In fact, U.S. police agencies have been working to identify and manage potential extremist “threats,” violent or otherwise, before they can become actual threats for some time now.
In much the same way that the USA Patriot Act was used as a front to advance the surveillance state, allowing the government to establish a far-reaching domestic spying program that turned every American citizen into a criminal suspect, the government’s anti-extremism program renders otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.
Be warned: once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, a dissident watch list, or a red flag gun watch list—there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there.
You will be tracked wherever you go.
You will be flagged as a potential threat and dealt with accordingly.
This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.
The government has been building its pre-crime, surveillance network in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the corporate sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).
If you’re not scared yet, you should be.
Connect the dots.
Start with the powers amassed by the government under the USA Patriot Act, note the government’s ever-broadening definition of what it considers to be an “extremist,” then add in the government’s detention powers under NDAA, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.
To that, add tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones and balloons that are beginning to blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the picture, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify so-called criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.
Hopefully you’re starting to understand how easy we’ve made it for the government to identify, label, target, defuse and detain anyone it views as a potential threat for a variety of reasons that run the gamut from mental illness to having a military background to challenging its authority to just being on the government’s list of persona non grata.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.
Almost immediately after his inauguration, President Joe Biden began creating new government dictates via executive orders. Many of these executive orders concern coronavirus, fulfilling Biden’s promise to make ramping up a coronavirus-inspired attack on liberty a focus of his first 100 days.
One of Biden’s executive orders imposes mask and social distancing mandates on anyone in a federal building or on federal land. The mandates also apply to federal employees when they are “on-duty” anywhere. Members of the military are included in the definition of federal employees. Will citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries where US troops are or will be “spreading democracy” be happy to learn the troops shooting up their towns are wearing masks and practicing social distancing?
Another one of Biden’s executive orders forces passengers on airplanes, trains, and other public transportation to wear masks.
Biden’s mask mandates contradict his pledge to follow the science. Studies have not established that masks are effective at preventing the spread of coronavirus. Regularly wearing a mask, though, can cause health problems.
Biden’s mask mandates are also an unconstitutional power grab. Some say these mandates are an exercise of the federal government’s constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. However, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to regulate interstate commerce. The president does not have the authority to issue executive orders regulating interstate commerce absent authorization by a valid law passed by Congress. The Founders gave Congress sole law-making authority, and they would be horrified by the modern practice of presidents creating law with a “stroke of a pen.”
Just as important, the Commerce Clause was not intended to give the federal government vast regulatory power. Far from giving the US government powers such as the power to require people to wear masks, the Commerce Clause was simply intended to ensure Congress could protect free trade among the states.
Biden also signed an executive order supporting using the Defense Production Act to increase the supply of vaccines, testing supplies, and other items deemed essential to respond to coronavirus. The Defense Production Act is a Cold War relic that gives the president what can fairly be called dictatorial authority to order private businesses to alter their production plans, and violate existing contracts with private customers, in order to produce goods for the government.
Mask and social distancing mandates, government control of private industry, and some of Biden’s other executive actions, such as one creating a new “Public Health Jobs Corps” with responsibilities including performing “contact tracing” on American citizens, are the type of actions one would expect from a fascist government, not a constitutional republic.
Joe Biden, who is heralded by many of his supporters as saving democracy from fascist Trump, could not even wait one day before beginning to implement fascistic measures that are completely unnecessary to protect public health. Biden will no doubt use other manufactured crises, including “climate change” and “domestic terrorism,” to expand government power and further restrict our liberty. Under Biden, fascism will not just carry an American flag. It will also wear a mask.
cover image credit naturalnews.com
Media Literally Compares Biden to God, Whitewashing New Face of US Police State & War Machine
January 20, 2021 was a historic day for Americans. It marked the day that Joseph Robinette Biden was sworn in as President, ridding the planet of orange man bad once and for all and restoring hope in the land of the free. All problems will be solved, debts forgiven, pandemics cured and a glorious heaven on Earth will flourish in the wake of the inauguration….or so the mainstream media says, almost verbatim.
In stark contrast to how the media portrayed Donald Trump as a reincarnation of Hitler, Joe Biden — a career politician, segregationist, police state worshipping warmonger — is receiving a warm embrace by our alleged non-partisan mainstream media.
As the newly elected racially diverse gift to the prison industrial complex duo assumes their respective thrones in the nation’s capitol, they can take solace in the fact that the mainstream media will be salivating over them as they take the torch from Trump and continue America’s worst policies.
The new face of the fascist American war machine has shifted from an R-rated orange baby and his sycophant dogmatic underling to a G-rated biracial team of woke warriors, ready to fulfil their roles by dropping hellfire missiles on hospitals and brown children from drones painted with BLM and LGBTQ flags.
To maintain the façade of perceived differences between the two parties, the leftist establishment media is already going to great lengths to paint Biden as America’s savior — quite literally.
MSNBC’s Eddie Glaude took a break this week while blaming Trump supporters for the 400,000 dead from COVID-19 and broke out in tears, literally comparing the new dynamic duo to God, citing Psalm 147:3.
“I’m thinking about all those folks who, just for a moment, the nation shared their grief,” Glaude said though crocodile tears. “Oh, what a first step. What a beautiful step.”
“I’m reminded of the Psalmist, you know, ‘He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds,’” Glaude said of his new messiah.
But that’s not all.
After MSNBC compared Biden to God, CNN did it too, claiming the lights around the reflecting pool for the COVID-19 victim memorial were like “extensions of Joe Biden’s arms embracing America.”
CNN’s scrupulously neutral and objective political director: the lights ‘were like extensions of Joe Biden’s arms embracing America.’ Expect much drooling at the feet power of this kind over the next few days and weeks. The mission: Rebrand America. Again! https://t.co/hLHTWMqycP
Make no mistake, when mainstream media repeats this rubbish propaganda enough times, Boobus Americanus will start to believe it. Most Americans will go back to sleep and continue to unquestioningly support the US government’s worst and most murderous foreign policies.
When the corporate press says “things will be different under a Biden presidency” rest assured that what they really mean is “we will be different under a Biden presidency,” and it has already started.
This was the exact play by the corporate media under Trump’s presidency as well, except the leftist media roasted the president every chance they got instead of worshiping him. Though the two approaches use opposite tactics, the result is the same — distracted Americans argue over irrelevant talking points while they continue to get dumbed down, sent off to wars, poorer, and less free.
The war machine knows no party. But don’t take my word for it, let’s get it right from Joe Biden.
Do you think Biden, who played a key role in starting the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, demolishing Libya, and saber rattling with Iran, is going to reign in the military industrial complex? If you do, then perhaps you can answer the question of why he filled his Pentagon transition team with war hawks from the weapons industry?
As InTheseTimes, reports, of the 23 people who comprise the Department of Defense agency review team, eight of them — or just over a third — list their “most recent employment” as organizations, think tanks or companies that either directly receive money from the weapons industry, or are part of this industry.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is listed as the “most recent employment” of three individuals on Biden’s Department of Defense agency review team: Kathleen Hicks (a former defense official under President Obama), Melissa Dalton and Andrew Hunter. CSIS is a hawkish and influential foreign policy think tank that receives funding from General Dynamics Corporation, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Lockheed Martin Corporation and other weapons manufacturers and defense contractors, as well as oil companies.
It’s not just the wars in the Middle East either. Biden will continue America’s foreign policy of overthrowing democratically elected leaders by provoking color revolutions and staging coups. In fact, before Biden was even sworn in he announced that he would complete Trump’s coup in Venezuela.
Domestically, Biden will continue to foster the police state and his inauguration should be evidence enough.
Did anyone take Biden seriously when he preached about freedom and unity from behind several tons of razor wire, 25,000 armed National Guard troops, bullet proof glass, concrete barricades, boarded up businesses and dozens of masked up warmongers? Asking for a nation.
However, if you think uncle Joe is going to toe the progressive line in the war on drugs and stop kidnapping, caging, and killing people over arbitrary substances the state deems illegal, again, you are mistaken. Despite a historical vote in Congress last month, to legalize cannabis federally, Biden has refused to even consider legalization as this is a major tool in the box of those who advocate for the prison industrial complex — just like Trump did before them and just like Biden and Harris both always have.
For people outraged by Trump putting “kids in cages” as part of his crackdown on illegal immigration, Joe Biden is not different. Remember, he was vice president during the Obama administration which aggressively deported more immigrants than Trump and who also put “kids in cages.” In fact, the photos used to first bring attention to kids in cages under Trump, were actually taken during Biden’s tenure as VP.
The reality of the situation is that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are merely new faces to the same empire that spread under Trump. This time, however, instead of using cheesy slogans like making America great again to dupe followers into supporting the military industrial complex, Biden and Harris will use woke virtue signaling and talking points on diversity to dupe their followers into supporting it.
As my readers know, I’ve spent the last year refuting every so-called COVID fact promoted by public health officials—including the false notion that SARS-CoV-2 has been proven to exist.
In this article, I’m simply showing that devotees of the Cult of COVID are contradicting their own assumptions. For purposes of argument only, we’ll assume the virus exists, spreads rapidly, and causes illness.
If so, lockdowns don’t work.
This is shown by reports from almost every nation in the world. The longer the lockdowns, the greater the number of COVID cases.
The virus is unstoppable. It travels to all corners of the globe at lightning speed.
Conclusion? The only way to achieve herd immunity is to have the whole population of the planet live and work out in the open, fight through the pandemic, and eventually win.
That’s the inference to draw, once you accept the mainstream view of the virus and the pandemic.
But of course, opening up the world is not the conclusion of the experts or the political leaders. They take the opposite view: more lockdowns.
They’re acting against their own “science.”
Why?
Obviously, because they want to imprison populations, destroy lives and economies. Or, at the very least, they’re going along with the people who want to.
What about the vaccine as a method of inducing herd immunity? We’re already hearing about a second mutated strain of the COVID virus. If there are two strains, there will certainly be more. Many more. This sets up an analog to the flu vaccine: a new version every year, with the hope of predicting the latest mutation.
How is that working for the flu? Is it producing anything faintly resembling herd immunity? Far from it. Public health agencies report a BILLION cases of the flu each and every year, worldwide. Could the protective effects of the vaccine be any weaker?
Note: Has anyone recommended locking down the planet because of the flu? Of course not. A billion cases a year are just “what we have to live with.”
Why not adopt the same strategy for COVID?
Public officials should be demanding an end to lockdowns.
Dr. Scott Atlas, former White House coronavirus advisor: “We know the lockdowns don’t work, they do not eliminate the virus, we see it all over the world. We have 80% of people in the US wearing masks, we have all these various levels of restrictions on businesses, on in-person schools, and the virus is not eliminated by that.”
Researchers Sunetra Gupta (Oxford University), Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford University), Martin Kildorff (Harvard): “Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health.”
Dr. John Ioannidis, professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health, and of Biomedical Data Science, and Statistics at Stanford University, responding to a question about laying on lockdowns in Greece: “It would be a devastating mistake to do so and it will run the risk of severely damaging and crippling the country.”
The Lancet, July 21, 2020: “…government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality,”
2006 paper in Biosecurity and Bioterrorism, “Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza” by Thomas V. Inglesby, Jennifer B. Nuzzo, Tara O’Toole, and D.A. Henderson. The authors conclude: “There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza.”
This is a just a sprinkling of mainstream references from a much larger trove, indicating that lockdowns are harmful and don’t work.
Well, they work when a police state is the goal.
The conventional mainstream scientific view of the virus and its ability to spread inevitably leads to the conclusion: stopping it through lockdowns is like trying to keep water out of a forest.
“Well, if we build a canopy above all the trees, if we wrap each tree in layers of plastic, if we install underground suction pumps every six feet, if we spray chemicals in the sky to disperse cloud formation, if we drain every brook and stream, if we build dams in the mountains to keep the melting snow contained…we’ll still fail.”
License definition: permission granted by an authority (as of a government or a business) to do some act or transaction which would be unlawful without such permission.
Licensure is on the rise despite a 2018 Institute of Justice study estimating that licensing costs the American economy nearly 2 million jobs and up to $197 billion annually. The document License to Work found that, for lower and moderate income occupations – hair stylists, massage therapists, preschool teachers – licensing was overly burdensome and irrational. In 2016, The Wisconsin Institute for Justice reported:
Onerous occupational licensing laws that force people to undergo thousands of hours of often redundant and gratuitous training to perform jobs like auctioneering, tree trimming, and hair styling. …licensing laws are the result of higher-skilled professionals seeking to protect their market share at the consumers’ expense.
The Medical License Landscape
Between 1875 and 1900, conventional medicine began passing license laws that granted national associations, such as The American Medical Association, (AMA), the right to oversee and regulate the practice of medicine, as well as collect heavy license fees. Government agencies, such as the FDA, do not apply regulations to treatment regimens or practices, only to products.
licensing laws raise prices for consumers by $1.93 billion each year and result in roughly 31,000 fewer jobs. Over the past two decades, the number of license holders has jumped by 34 percent in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the number of occupational licensing categories has soared by 84 percent.
How A License Is Like A Vaccine
While licensed doctors attempt to legislate choice for everyone, their medicine continues to be a one-size-fits-all approach. In failing to evolve, the medical system applies a license like a vaccine:
Where a license is used as a shield to protect the medical industry, a vaccine is a shield to that provides legal immunity to vaccine makers against lawsuits from vaccine damage.
Where a license replaces inherent rights for acquired rights and privileges, a vaccine usurps innate immunity for acquired immunity.
Where a license reflects a transfer of power from a free market (self-regulation) to a controlled-market (state-regulation), a vaccine reflects a transfer of power from self-healing to disease management.
Where a license is legal permission from an authority (i.e. State government, medical board) to do something that would otherwise be deemed illegal, a vaccine is legal permission to inject toxins that would otherwise be deemed illegal to ingest.
Where a license is based on the theory of “standard of care,” a vaccine is based on the standard of “The Germ Theory of Disease.”
If vaccines work so well, then what do the vaccinated fear from the unvaccinated?
The “Standard of Care” Deception
The medical authority determines the “standard of care” which is a degree of care a doctor is expected to exercise. Standard of Care is based on practice guidelines, the medical literature, hospital policies and procedures, state and federal regulations, and other sources. A 2005 article in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law stated that “The precise definition of the standard of care varies from one state to another… Practice guidelines evolve and change, driven by new developments in clinical practice and science… After 5.8 years, half of the practice guidelines are outdated.”
In reality, standards do not exist. They shift with opinions, especially in a world where patients can get a second or third or fourth medical opinion for each diagnosis. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) holds the opinion that vaccines are “safe and effective.” The US Supreme Court holds the opinion that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” And the British Medical Journal holds the opinion that medical error is the third leading cause of death in America, known as iatrogenic, or “doctor-caused” death. In 2021, with rising healthcare costs, rising disease rates, and rising uninsured people, it appears as if the medical system is designed to fail.
What Does Licensed Medicine Have To Fear?
Under the scope of the Medical Practice Act, a medical school graduate must first acquire a license before he or she can legally practice and use the title “MD,” “DO, “DC, “physician,” or “doctor.”
Licensed allopathic medicine allows the doctor to prescribe toxic synthetic drugs that include black box warnings and adverse health effects, many of which come with an LD50; the Lethal Dose of a drug that kills 50 percent of the tested population.
Licensed medicine authorizes a doctor to regulate your body using standard medical protocols and bill you according to standard medical codes.
Licensed medicine means the State owns your body, as a ward of the state, and can claim your body, if they determine you to be incompetent.
Licensed medicine allows a medical doctor to “prescribe,” “treat” and “diagnose,” to puncture the skin, and to cut into the body.
If the license works so well, what do licensed doctors fear from unlicensed healers?
Holistic Medicine Is Not Licensed Medicine
Holistic practitioners do not attend medical school. They do not practice licensed medicine. They do not prescribe, treat, or diagnose. They do not puncture the skin, and do not cut into the body. They do not suggest medical alternatives. They do not use standard medical protocols or bill using standard medical codes.
Holistic healers work with Nature’s tools such as herbs, sunshine, clean water, real food. They do not treat symptoms with FDA-approved synthetic drugs, but look for the cause and allow the body to heal itself. The holistic healer sees each individual as pure potential and unique in body, mind, and spirit. Individuality over Uniformity.
Both allopathic and holistic medicine are healing modalities on a spectrum of choice. Where allopathic medicine ends, holistic medicine begins. One does not encroach upon the other. One is an apple, the other an orange.
As has been the case since 1900, the practice of licensed medicine co-exists alongside unlicensed medicine because choice exists. One cannot legislate choice for another. As history shows, rulers do not eliminate choice through unjust laws. They only drive it underground.
In a free society, everyone has the right to give advice and the right to choose advice from allopaths, osteopaths, naturopaths, homeopaths, herbalists, and chiropractors.
Right To Be Left Alone
The right of privacy is a Constitutional right that means the right to personal autonomy, or the right to choose whether or not to engage in certain acts or have certain experiences. The right to privacy:
includes a general right to be left alone and to be protected from governmental interference. It also includes the freedom of the individual to make fundamental choices involving the individual, his or her family, and relationships with others, except where such choices prove to be harmful to others and possibly oneself.”
With few exceptions, an absolute right to choose any treatment has not held up in court. One exception:
[W]e see no reason why a patient should not be allowed to make an informed decision to go outside currently approved medical methods in search of an unconventional treatment. While a patient should be encouraged to exercise care for his own safety, we believe that an informed decision to avoid surgery and conventional chemotherapy is within the patient’s right “to determine what shall be done with his own body.
The State of Wisconsin was featured in the March 2000 Journal of Family Practice showing demand for more alternative healing options. Four reasons emerged as the basis for this: 1) Holism (whole person approach), 2) Empowerment, 3) Access, and 4) Legitimization.[i]
Like rights, healing and freedom are embodied. They are inherent. They require no license. Using free-will, each individual authorizes any practice over his own body, his private property, through consent or the withdrawal of consent.
People who seek to preserve choice and legitimize holistic medicine must stand up and speak out for that right. Each is responsible for her own body and her own health. When it comes to choice, the only freedom you have is the freedom you defend.
In legislating the choice to heal, do legislators practice medicine without a license?
The National Health Freedom Action is a non-profit organization working to protect your choice in order to access natural healing modalities, while also protecting the rights of practitioners of Naturopathy, Herbalism, Homeopathy, Ayurveda, etc., to practice medicine without a license. Contact them at www.nationalhealthfreedom.org/nhfa. In Wisconsin, contact the Wisconsin Health Freedom Coalition and join me to preserve choice and access to holistic practitioners.
[i] Barlett, B., L. Marchad, J. Scheder, and D. Applebaum, Bridging the Gap Between Conventional and Alternative Medicine, Journal of Family Practice 49, no. 3 (March 4, 2000): 234-9; available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10735483 (accessed June 15, 2017).
In this video you’ll see how people treat free speech these days. Should freedom of speech still be a thing? Of course not! You’ll learn that freedom of speech causes violence and it needs to be censored because it’s highly dangerous. You also learn how depressed freedom of speech feels.
Ryan Audette (pictured at right) is a Calgary man who was issued a $50 ticket at the end of November, for allegedly not wearing a mask, while exercising his Charter rights to attend a peaceful protest against lockdowns. An estimated one thousand people were at the rally in downtown Calgary.
Trevor Marr (pictured left) was issued a $1200 ticket under the Public Health Act after getting off a C-train and noticing a protest rally on December 19 in downtown Calgary. After noticing the large crowd, Mr. Marr decided to make a spur of the moment decision and go and listen. Says Mr. Marr, “I agreed with what the Speaker was saying, the restrictions resembled Communist China more than freedom-of-speech-Canada. It felt good to live in a Democracy where I thought we were free to protest!”
Bernie Driedger (pictured at right) is a primary care paramedic who was issued a $1200 ticket on December 22, 2020, for not wearing a mask while buying a turkey and ham in a small Co-op grocery store in La Crete, Alberta. He was photographed, he believes, by a “nosy out-of-towner going around town taking pictures of La Crete residents and businesses because the majority of people refuse to wear masks.” “I believe the photo was sent in to the provincial snitch line,” he explains.
Trevor Simpson (pictured left) is a Calgary man who was ticketed $1200 for allegedly not practicing safe social distancing, at a lockdown protest in Calgary on Boxing Day. He says police waited until he was three blocks away from the rally and alone, and was blocked by four Calgary Police Service officers on bicycles. “It was really outlandish to me that they would wait until I was no longer breaking the law to actually fine me!” says Mr. Simpson. “I told the police as they were writing the ticket that it went against my Charter rights and I did not believe the ticket was legal and fair.”
