Forced or mandatory vaccination

[ExomatrixTV]

• Another Blue State Announces Plans For ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated

Why does it seem that liberal dominated states so much more authoritarian than conservative states?

[ExomatrixTV]

• Supreme Court Justice Spreads COVID Misinformation About Basic Facts:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=8fwF8sV7LcE

[ExomatrixTV]

• Eerie Video From Proctor & Gamble Employees Emerges:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=1JeIjvAKaIk

[ExomatrixTV]

• Corporate News Smears Supreme Court As “Anti-Vaxx”:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=REJa6wc-Jfk

[Mike Gorman]

Corporate morality is such a disgusting minefield of hypocrisy and blatant grandstanding; they leaped at the opportunity to demand employees comply with Vax mandates, they are misinformed and woefully ignorant, or much worse culpable with this global initiative to weaken and kill large numbers of currently healthy people

[ExomatrixTV]

• When Does The Emergency End?': Amy Coney Barrett Grills Pro-Vaccine Mandate Biden Admin. Lawyer:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=eGBxl2Fx14M

[Pam]

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

• Another Blue State Announces Plans For ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated

Why does it seem that liberal dominated states so much more authoritarian than conservative states?

It looks like my own brother as a very high 'official' with the Washington State Health department will be playing a role in making it possible for his 2 sisters and nephew to be placed in an internment camp. I am kind of speechless.

[palehorse]

Posted by Pam (here)

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

• Another Blue State Announces Plans For ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated

Why does it seem that liberal dominated states so much more authoritarian than conservative states?

It looks like my own brother as a very high 'official' with the Washington State Health department will be playing a role in making it possible for his 2 sisters and nephew to be placed in an internment camp. I am kind of speechless.

I am sorry to hear that Pam, I am in a similar situation, a family member is a high rank in the Army and he already showed all signals what side he is. I stopped talking to him and well all the rest of my family a while ago, it been very hard, but now I finally can feel a relieve from that burden family of mine, does not sounds good speaking like that, but unfortunately it is the truth, let's keep moving and do our very own special thing.

[Lilyofthestars]

I was set to move to Washington later this year... I'm going to have to seriously rethink this as I have no plans on being vaccinated. Oregon will probably follow close behind, where I currently live. Terrifying.

[ExomatrixTV]

• Japan’s Vaccination Policy: No Force, No Discrimination

[ExomatrixTV]

• BREAKING: OSHA Mandates BLOCKED By Supreme Court... Sort Of... & My Reaction To Joe Biden Video!:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5ZHZiyoUKKY

[ExomatrixTV]

• Washington DC's New COVID Rule for 12-Year Olds Will Scare You | DM CLIPS | Rubin Report:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=04ZWqOuB45Y

[ExomatrixTV]

• White House Reacts To Supreme Court Blocking Biden's Vaccine-Or-Test Mandate For Employers:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=yZwXF2xa-Jk

[cursichella1]

Spinmaster feed to Psaki: Businesses that don't require vaccinations won't be "safe for consumers", and workplaces that don't require it won't be "safe for workers". Aren't they clever?!

Their chutzpadik interpretations of reality never fail to amaze me.

[onawah]

Supreme Court Strikes Down OSHA Mandate, Says Vaccine Mandates for Healthcare Workers Can Proceed
01/13/22
By
Megan Redshaw
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...a-386bf425dd10

"The U.S. Supreme Court today rejected the Biden administration’s mandate requiring employees of large businesses to be vaccinated against COVID or undergo weekly testing and wear a mask indoors while working.

The court’s conservative majority said the administration overstepped its authority by imposing the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) vaccine-or-test rule on U.S. businesses with at least 100 employees.

At the same time, the court allowed to move forward a separate rule mandating COVID vaccines for workers in healthcare facilities that receive Medicare or Medicaid.

The Supreme Court on Jan. 7 heard oral arguments pertaining to both of the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandates. The focus of the hearing was whether to stay or to grant temporary injunctions requested by plaintiffs in a number of lawsuits challenging the emergency mandates for millions of Americans.

At the time, the rule issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), was stayed for 24 states that initiated lawsuits, but the OSHA stay was lifted by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court’s decision today reversed the lower court rulings, imposing a stay on the OSHA mandate and allowing the CMS rule to proceed.Today’s rulings came three days after the OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard went into effect, targeting more than 84 million workers and two-thirds of the nation’s private-sector workforce.

The conservative justices wrote in an unsigned opinion:

“OSHA has never before imposed such a mandate. Nor has Congress. Indeed, although Congress has enacted significant legislation addressing the COVID–19 pandemic, it has declined to enact any measure similar to what OSHA has promulgated here.”

The conservative majority also expressed concerns over the implications of allowing OSHA to implement a widespread mandate without congressional authorization.

“Permitting OSHA to regulate the hazards of daily life — simply because most Americans have jobs and face those same risks while on the clock — would significantly expand OSHA’s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization,” the opinion stated.

A majority of the Supreme Court’s justices concluded the applicants challenging OSHA’s mandate were likely to succeed in the merits of their claim and the secretary of labor lacked authority to impose the mandate, resulting in a stay while the case works its way through the 6th Circuit Court.

“Administrative agencies are creatures of statute,” the justices wrote. “They accordingly possess only the authority that Congress has provided.”

In a joint dissent of the OSHA ruling, the court’s three liberal justices argued the court was overreaching by substituting its judgment for that of health experts.

“Acting outside of its competence and without legal basis, the Court displaces the judgments of the Government officials given the responsibility to respond to workplace health emergencies,” Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a joint dissent.

The justices contended OSHA’s mandate is comparable to a fire or sanitation regulation imposed by the agency, while the majority said a vaccine mandate is strikingly unlike the workplace regulations that OSHA has typically imposed as a vaccination “cannot be undone at the end of the workday.”

SCOTUS allows CMS rule to move forward

In a separate opinion, the court allowed a rule issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to take effect.

The mandate is estimated to affect 10.3 million healthcare workers in the U.S., but allows for religious and medical exemptions. The rule was previously blocked by two lower courts for the 24 states that challenged the rule.

The opinion stated:

“Vaccination requirements are a common feature of the provision of healthcare in America: Healthcare workers around the country are ordinarily required to be vaccinated for diseases such as hepatitis B, influenza, and measles, mumps, and rubella. As the Secretary explained, these pre-existing state requirements are a major reason the agency has not previously adopted vaccine mandates as a condition of participation.”

The opinion went on to suggest healthcare workers and public health organizations “overwhelmingly support” the CMS rule.

“Indeed, their support suggests that a vaccination requirement under these circumstances is a straightforward and predictable example of the […] regulations that Congress has authorized the Secretary to impose,” the opinion states.

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, dissented.

“Neither CMS nor the Court articulates a limiting principle for why, after an unexplained and unjustified delay, an agency can regulate first and listen later, and then put more than 10 million healthcare workers to the choice of their jobs or an irreversible medical treatment,” Justice Alito wrote.

“The challenges posed by a global pandemic do not allow a federal agency to exercise power that Congress has not conferred upon it. At the same time, such unprecedented circumstances provide no grounds for limiting the exercise of authorities the agency has long been recognized to have,” Justices Alito and Thomas wrote, stating the “latter principle governs” in the healthcare cases.

Mary Holland, president of Children’s Health Defense (CHD) said in an email to The Defender:

“CHD is delighted to see that the Supreme Court, 6-3, has upheld the preliminary injunction in the OSHA case, deciding that the administration lacked the authority to impose a COVID injection mandate on corporations with more than 100 employees.

“We are concerned, however, that the Supreme Court upheld the administration’s CMS mandate for healthcare workers. This mandate of an experimental, unapproved pharmaceutical product with only an ‘Emergency Use Authorization’ designation violates federal law and the Nuremberg Code, prohibiting coercion for participation in experimental medicine. We will continue to fight for true informed consent for all people.”

Scientists submit brief to SCOTUS on ineffectiveness of COVID vaccines

Drs. Luc Montagnier, co-winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine, Harvey Risch, a Yale Professor of Epidemiology and Robert Malone, co-inventor of mRNA concepts and processes used in the existing COVID vaccines filed two briefs (first brief, second brief) as amici curiae in support of the applicants’ application for a stay or preliminary injunction of the OSHA and CMS mandates.

The briefs were designed to “highlight critical facts concerning Omicron — facts not addressed in the administrative record,” while “correcting an important false statement of fact in an amicus brief submitted by the American Medical Association et al. so that the court is not led into error.”

In their briefs, Montagnier, Rische and Malone argued neither OSHA nor CMS did any analysis of vaccine effectiveness against the COVID virus as it now exists and there is no evidence to suggest vaccination “will curb the spread of the virus we now face.” "

[onawah]

Schools Shouldn’t Mandate ‘Most Dangerous Vaccines in Human History’
By Children's Health Defense Team
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...ovid-vaccines/
1/13/22

"As schools weigh COVID vaccine mandates for children as young as 5 years old, former Pfizer exec warns injections “are toxic by design” and it seems obvious “criminal acts are being committed.”

In late October and early November, the self-serving members of two committees advising the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) without a second thought endorsed experimental COVID vaccines for children as young as 5 years old.

Ignoring the 99.995% COVID survival rate for those age 17 and under, the 31 pharma-servile “experts” also appeared unconcerned by reams of damning data about COVID-vaccine-related disabilities and fatalities already occurring in the 12–17 age group — unnecessary tragedies being acknowledged that very instant in a panel discussion convened by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

Predictably, adverse event data and urgent frontline healthcare provider testimony began pouring in almost immediately after the FDA-CDC go-ahead, with 5- to 11-year-olds experiencing the same kinds of “terrifying” vaccine reactions as adolescents — including blood clots, strokes and other brain and heart problems previously almost unheard-of in young people.

In the lead-up to the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization of experimental COVID jabs for younger children, state politicians and municipal school districts also started to grease the skids to mandate COVID injections for in-person school attendance.

To date, the number of states and school systems announcing or adopting coercive plans, either for K-12 students or students ages 12 or 16 and up, is still small. However, the symbolic weight of the “early adopters” is significant.


These include states like California and Louisiana (and soon New York); major cities like Washington, D.C. (and probably New York City); and large school districts such as those in Oakland, California, and Los Angeles.

In addition, the New York City and Washington, D.C. school districts, and some or all districts in California, Hawaii and Maryland, require students involved in sports and other extracurricular activities to get jabbed.

In what sounds like good news, the National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) confirmed 17 states — Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Utah — have enacted laws or issued executive orders that ban COVID-19 vaccine mandates for students.

However, most of the bans are limited to certain circumstances, with some applying only to higher education and some only to vaccines authorized under emergency use — meaning the ban would not apply to COVID vaccines that in the future gain full FDA approval for children.

Most dangerous ever

For decades, vaccines have been wreaking havoc on children’s health. For instance, consider the following:

The 400 adverse events listed in the package inserts of licensed childhood vaccines
The epidemic of chronic health problems in American children — including 1 in 16 boys with autism in California, the state with the highest autism rate in the nation
The precipitous decline in sudden infant deaths that coincided with the disruption of “routine” vaccination during the 2020 lockdowns.
The superior health of far less heavily vaccinated Japanese children.
So, when observers familiar with COVID injection data pronounce them “the most dangerous vaccines in human history,” that is saying something.

Dr. Joseph Mercola warned the COVID jabs are setting up children for “potentially lifelong health problems,” including serious heart problems resulting from myocarditis. As he wrote in early January:

“[T]he recent push to inject children with a genetic experiment may be one of the worst public health offenses perpetrated on a population of people who are unable to speak for themselves, do not have a legal voice and depend on adults to protect them.”

California ‘leads’

California spent the past half-dozen years systematically eliminating personal-belief vaccine exemptions and gutting medical exemptions.

Not content with those assaults on health freedom, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced in early October — apparently reading the minds, weeks in advance, of the FDA and CDC committee members who subsequently rubber-stamped the COVID shots for 5- to 11-year-olds — that his state would impose a K-12 mandate in both public and private schools, making California the first state to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for in-person school attendance.

The mandate hinges on the vaccines “receiving full licensure from the FDA for children,” which the state expects in July 2022.

Seeking to normalize his COVID mandate, Newsom compared it to the existing school requirements for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination.

However, in light of the strong, statistically significant relationship between MMR vaccines and autism — and given California’s status as the state with the highest autism prevalence — Newsom’s comparison is scarcely reassuring.

Louisiana ignores

In mid-December, Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards added COVID vaccines to the list of required school shots, overturning a bipartisan vote against such a mandate by the state’s House Health and Welfare Committee.

The push for the mandate originated with the Louisiana Department of Health. The House Health Committee then voted 13-2 to reject the department’s recommendation, stating that COVID vaccination “should be the parents’ decision,” a common-sense view shared by legislators and parents around the nation.

However, the governor vetoed the committee vote — and the wishes of citizens who packed the committee meeting to protest mandates — dismissively characterizing their objections as “overheated rhetoric.”

Louisiana’s governor and health officials also ignored remarks delivered at the health committee hearing by experienced Louisiana nurse Collette Martin, R.N. Martin provided testimony about serious adverse reactions in children and their widespread underreporting. She told the committee:

“We are not just seeing severe acute reactions with this vaccine, but we have zero idea what any long-term reactions are. Cancers, autoimmune [disorders], infertility. We just don’t know.”

Louisiana’s mandate, which goes into effect in fall 2022, currently applies only to students ages 16 and up, “but could expand as the vaccines get the highest level of approval” from the FDA.

School districts (try to) impose

In early January, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki asserted that decisions on school vaccine mandates “are up to local school districts.”

However, the U.S. Department of Education has been working with school districts, Psaki said, “to provide resources, connect school officials with testing providers, and set up vaccine clinics….”

Last September, Maryland’s health secretary disingenuously made similar comments, telling the press that the state prefers “not to be intentionally overbearing” or “interventionist” and instead encourages school systems “to take the lead in their individual jurisdictions.”

In California, school board members in several large school districts showed, as early as September, they were willing to “take the lead” in imposing mandates for in-person instruction.

The plans of school boards in Los Angeles (the nation’s second-largest school district), Oakland and San Diego have been undermined, however, by the large number of unvaccinated students and other apparently unforeseen pitfalls.

The Los Angeles school district, for example, pushed back its initial Jan. 10 deadline to the fall of 2022, because tens of thousands of uninjected students would have “overwhelmed the district’s independent study program.”

L.A. students ages 12 and up are supposed to upload proof of vaccination into a “Daily Pass” system. The L.A. district already requires students to undergo weekly testing (regardless of vaccination status) and subjects them to other measures such as “daily health checks,” masking and contact tracing and isolation of cases.

Three out of ten students failed to show up on the first day of school following winter break, “having tested positive for the coronavirus.”

Oakland’s school district will not enforce its mandate until Jan. 31, a month later than originally planned. When the school board voted (5-1-1) in favor of mandating COVID shots for in-person instruction for students 12 and up, it apparently did not bargain on nearly two-fifths of students in that age group (38%) remaining unvaccinated.

Casting the lone “no” vote, Oakland school board member Mike Hutchinson stated, “I don’t think we should be rolling out at midnight on a not very publicized meeting, talking about mandatory vaccinations when there’s nothing wrong with taking our due time to deliberate to make sure that we get it right.”

In December, however, Hutchinson indicated he would be comfortable deferring to the state-level mandate.

In late December in San Diego, a judge struck down the school district’s COVID vaccine mandate for students 16 and older, arguing the state legislature has not given individual school districts the authority to mandate vaccines for school attendance.

Not timid

An Oakland pediatrician who egged on her city’s school board to vote in favor of COVID mandates argued last fall, “This is not the time for timidity.”

However, as evidence accumulates about the injections’ outsized risks for children, it seems increasingly clear that a number of so-called public servants do not have a problem with timidity, having shown themselves perfectly willing to harm — and kill — children.

For former Pfizer executive Dr. Mike Yeadon, who has argued for months that the COVID injections “are toxic by design” and “were always going to harm people,” it seems obvious “criminal acts are being committed.”

Now is the time to push back against criminality and coercion — including COVID vaccine mandates and “vaccine passports” — in whatever ways we can. Our children’s lives, and our own lives, depend on it."

[ExomatrixTV]

• Biden Tells Businesses To Buck Supreme Court Ruling Against His Vaccine Mandate:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=A24WclNvZxA

[ExomatrixTV]

• Dr Steve James: I’d sacrifice my job over Vaccine Mandates:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=4Ik6cxFBbBw

[Gwin Ru]

...

[Gwin Ru]

EU Regulators, WHO Call for End to COVID Boosters, Citing Evidence Strategy Is Failing

EU drug regulators, World Health Organization experts and the former chairman of the UK’s COVID task force all cited mounting evidence mRNA COVID boosters aren’t working and the strategy should be dropped.

By Megan Redshaw

European Union drug regulators on Tuesday warned frequent COVID boosters could adversely affect the immune system and said there are currently no data to support repeated doses.

This comes a month after EU drug regulators said it made sense to “administer COVID-19 vaccine boosters as early as three months after the initial two-shot regimen,” amid concerns over the Omicron variant.

According to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), continued booster doses every four months could pose a risk of overloading people’s immune systems and lead to fatigue.

Instead, the agency recommended countries space out the intervals between boosters and coordinate their programs with the onset of the cold season in each hemisphere — following blueprints of influenza vaccination strategies.

“While use of additional boosters can be part of contingency plans, repeated vaccinations within short intervals would not represent a sustainable long-term strategy,” the EMA’s head of vaccines strategy, Marco Cavaleri, said Tuesday during a press briefing.

Boosters “can be done once, or maybe twice, but it’s not something that we can think should be repeated constantly,” Cavaleri said.

“We need to think about how we can transition from the current pandemic setting to a more endemic setting.”

Cavaleri said more data is needed on the impact of Omicron on vaccines and a better understanding of the evolution of the current wave to decide whether a vaccine specific to the new variant is needed.

“Preliminary results from recently published studies are showing that the vaccine effectiveness against the symptomatic disease is significantly reduced for Omicron and tends to wane over time,” Cavaleri said.

“It is important that there is a good discussion around the choice of the composition of the vaccine to make sure that we have a strategy that is not just reactive … and try to come up with an approach that will be suitable in order to prevent a future variant,” he added.

Just last month, Cavaleri, speaking on behalf of the EMA, said it made sense to administer COVID boosters as early as three months after the initial two-dose regimen due to “extremely worrying” infection numbers.

“While the current recommendation is to administer boosters preferably after six months, the data currently available support safe and effective administration of a booster as early as three months from completion,” Cavaleri said during a press briefing in December.

WHO warns repeated boosters not viable strategy against new variants
The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition (TAG-CO-VAC) on Jan. 11 warned,

“a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original vaccine composition is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable.”

The expert group, created by the WHO to assess the performance of COVID vaccines, said providing fresh doses of already existing vaccines as new strains of the virus emerge is not the best way to fight a pandemic.

TAG-CO-VAC said COVID vaccines that can prevent infection and transmission, in addition to preventing severe disease and death are needed and should be developed. []

Until such vaccines are available, and as the SARS-CoV-2 virus evolves, the composition of current COVID vaccines may need to be updated, the group said.

COVID vaccines need to be genetically and antigenically close to the circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants, be more effective in protection against infection, and should elicit an immune response that is broad, strong and long-lasting in order to reduce the need for successive booster doses, TAG-CO-VAC said.

“It’s over, people,” Alex Berenson, former New York Times reporter and best-selling author, wrote. “Aside from a few unlucky Israelis, no one is going to receive a fourth dose of the original vaccine.”

Berenson wrote:

“Everyone with eyes can see it doesn’t work against Omicron — and if you haven’t gotten a third dose, at this point, why would you? You are getting at most weeks of marginally improved protection for potentially severe side effects.

“Instead the WHO is now promising/demanding vaccines based on whatever the dominant Sars-Cov-2 strain is at the moment. That promise is as empty as all the others the health bureaucrats and vaccine companies have made.”

Berenson noted there have been at least five major “variants of concern” in the last year alone, two of which became globally dominant.

“Even the mRNA vaccines cannot be cooked up and delivered fast enough to match whatever strain of virus becomes dominant,” Berenson said.

“COVID is faster than the scientists.”

UK expert calls for COVID to be treated as an endemic virus similar to flu
COVID should be treated as an endemic virus similar to the flu and mass vaccination should end after the booster campaign, said Dr. Clive Dix, former chairman of the UK’s vaccine task force.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an endemic refers to

“the constant presence and/or usual prevalence of a disease or infectious agent in a population within a geographic area,” whereas a pandemic is an “out of control” epidemic that has spread over several countries or continents, usually affecting a large number of people.

“We need to analyze whether we use the current booster campaign to ensure the vulnerable are protected if this is seen to be necessary,” he said. “Mass population-based vaccination in the UK should now end.”

Calling for a “major rethink” of the UK’s COVID strategy, Dix encouraged the ministers to “urgently back research into COVID immunity beyond antibodies” to include B-cells and white blood cells, called T-cells.

Dix said there should be a shift to disease management from viral spreading, and “stopping progression to severe disease in vulnerable groups” should be the future objective.

Megan Redshaw
Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.