COVID SCANDALS HIT THE MAINSTREAM
Hospital Sued for Mandating Covid Shot; World Rocked by the Fauci Email Dump; ICAN to Public Own Fauci FOIA; Dr. Ron Paul on Censorship & Liberty
Chalk up a victory vs. public health tyranny! In the face of massive public resistance, so-called ‘officials’ have retreated from their unscientific and misanthropic propaganda tactics.
Another round of record protests across in London (barely acknowledged in corporate media) has served as a bellwether for the surging distaste against several forms of public health Covid edicts.
After more than a year ignoring the data and science to lockdown the world, public health officials have begun reluctantly abandoning many of their heavy-handed tactics. Taking a “carrot and stick” approach, global populations have been continually beaten with a medical stick to force compliance. Yet few doing the ‘beating’ cared to look at history or do a simple cost-benefit analysis to examine the erroneous plan for their populations.
Continued analysis of the data behind lockdowns shows epic failures that have set society back in unimaginable ways. Forcing public health edicts illogically has forever weakened confidence in governmental and global health bodies.
Canadian economist Douglas W. Allen recently published an examination of over 80 Covid-19 studies, taking a critical look at the literature to assess the lockdown Cost vs. Benefits:
“There are about 45 stringency points from the least stringent country (Russia: 40.28) to the most stringent (Ireland: 84.26). Over this range, moving from the least to most stringent lockdown increases the cumulative deaths per million by 630 deaths. Contrary to the popular understanding, lockdown is not associated with fewer deaths per million, but more. “
Despite the false assertion by public health officials that the limited, available science pointed to lockdowns being the only solution, Allen refutes this, stating:
“By August there was enough information available to show that any reasonable cost/benefit analysis would show that lockdown was creating more harm than good. It is unreasonable to suggest that a proper decision could not have been made in the fall when the second wave of infections hit.”
The public is emboldened like never before to both return to normal and disobey public health officials pushing irrational, unscientific orders whose only roots stem from virtue signaling, political jockeying and/or petty power plays. It’s over. And would-be government employees refusing to see the writing on the wall will be voted out of office.
Established in April 2020 and composed by a group of multi-disciplinary professionals, the Pandemics Data & Analytics (or PANDA) organization understands this. PANDA stands for open science, rational debate about replacing flawed science, and for retrieving liberty and prosperity from the clutches of a dystopian “new normal”.
The organization recently released its 17-page analysis and Declaration for the Protection of Children and Young People. It states:
“Evidence already shows serious damage to the physical, mental and social wellbeing of children and young people, as well as their educational attainment and future prospects (Lewis et al., 2021). There was never a reason to disrupt the lives of children and young people and there is every reason to restore normality to this population. Policymakers should take immediate action to protect children and young people from further harm and injustice, now and in the future.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is facing down a scandal from several directions. First, internal emails revealed the agency relied upon politically motivated actors, rather than science, to craft its school reopening policy. Secondly, the agency’s mask guidance was peppered with confusion and questionable science.
Research examining mitigation practices and Covid-19 rates in Florida, New York and Massachusetts’ schools continued to drive home the CDC’s scientific misadventures. After looking at all the data encompassing public schools and districts for the 2020-2021 school year, the authors concluded “…we do not see a correlation between mask mandates and COVID-19 rates among students…”
Even at this advanced stage of public revelation and transparency to the failed policies of some tone-deaf public health officials, some are still desperately trying to move the goalposts. For example: After the goal of lowering case counts in an effort to return to normal was reached, officials in Australia and New Zealand demanded a zero-Covid approach! Good luck with that.
Meanwhile, Ontario has announced a three-step plan to reopen the province, starting with outdoor recreational amenities, as it gradually prepares to ease pandemic restrictions. But wait! Hold on! Forget about lower case counts or mortality rates, Ontario must wait at least two weeks after 60 per cent of adults have received one dose of the vaccine!
In the U.S., the reopening has happened too rapidly for power-hungry public officials still not ready to give up their ill-gotten fiefdoms. The vaccine passport idea continues to be a non-starter in the USA as many governors checkmated the idea with a slew of early executive orders and bills.
Defaulting to individual businesses, a few governors have resorted to making weary frontline business owners manually violate their patron’s health privacy by asking them to check the vaccine status of everyone who enters their establishment. This is the textbook definition of fascism, by the way: The marriage of government and industry.
Other businesses have simply removed their “face masks mandatory” signs and replaced them with masking suggestions for the unvaccinated. How many people are complying no one knows for sure.
A month ago, headlines told of an impending U.K. domestic vaccine passport despite widespread public distaste. It manifested in the form of an NHS app which had some concerning additional features as exposed during an interview on U.K.’s Talk Radio:
In a surprising plot twist, following this weekend’s capacity protests, plans for the U.K. vaccine passport have reportedly been scrapped. In a Telegraph exclusive, ‘officials’ working on Covid-19 status certification believe there is no chance the law will be changed to mandate vaccine passports’ use within the U.K. Called a “well-placed source” by The Telegraph stated, “No one is talking about it still as a potential thing … It has been killed off really.”
As travel and employment appear to be the new chokepoints to ram through vaccine certificates, are governments defaulting to private business to finish the op? Or will something happen that gives officials a rejuvenated push in the near future?
Judge dismisses lawsuit filed by Houston hospital system employees who refused coronavirus vaccine
A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a lawsuit filed by 117 staffers at Houston Methodist over the hospital system’s coronavirus vaccine requirement for employees, a decision that could have implications in other battles over such mandates.
The hospital system was among the first in the country to require all workers to be inoculated against the virus, which has killed about 600,000 people in the United States. More than 99 percent of its 26,000-strong workforce complied. But a small fraction refused, and chief executive Marc Boom said Tuesday that more than 170 employees had been suspended as a result.
Among them was Jennifer Bridges, a nurse who became the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit over the vaccine requirement after months of publicly opposing it. The complaint, filed last month, argued that the mandate is unlawful and forces “employees to be human ‘guinea pigs’ as a condition for continued employment.”
But U.S. District Judge Lynn N. Hughes rejected that argument. In his ruling, he said the lawsuit’s claim that the vaccines are experimental and dangerous “is false, and it is also irrelevant.” The hospital system’s requirement does not violate state or federal law or public policy, he wrote.
The judge took particular issue with the complaint equating the mandate to medical experimentation during the Holocaust, calling the comparison “reprehensible.”
“Methodist is trying to do their business of saving lives without giving them the covid-19 virus,” Hughes wrote. “It is a choice made to keep staff, patients and their families safer. Bridges can freely choose to accept or refuse a covid-19 vaccine; however, if she refuses, she will simply need to work somewhere else.”
The lawsuit’s dismissal appears to be one of the first rulings over an issue that has sparked contentious debate across the country as the economy opens up and more people return to school and work. Legal experts expect further litigation as some business, hospitals and universities begin requiring vaccination.
Valerie Gutmann Koch, co-director of the University of Houston’s Health Law & Policy Institute, called the decision “another step in demonstrating the legality of these mandates, particularly in a health crisis like this.”
“There isn’t much there to rely on to argue these mandates should be illegal,” she said.
The three coronavirus vaccines used in the United States have not received full approval from the Food and Drug Administration, but they have been authorized for emergency use following rigorous clinical trials. As of Sunday, more than 173 million people had received at least one dose of the vaccine in the United States, representing just over 52 percent of the nation’s population.
Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale University, characterized the lawsuit’s claims as “absurd” in recent remarks to The Washington Post, noting that tens of thousands of people participated in the vaccine trials. The suit also repeats misinformation circulated widely online about the shots altering DNA.
The inoculations are seen as key to a return to normalcy, yet most employers have shied away from mandating them, concerned about the thorny politics and previously untested legal issues. Colleges and universities, along with Houston Methodist and a handful of other health-care institutions, are the exception.
Koch said the ruling shows “employer mandates of the covid-19 vaccine, particularly in the health care arena, are absolutely legal.” She said she expects to see more legal battles around vaccination mandates but noted she has “always predicted that they have very thin legal legs to stand on.”
There is precedent for vaccine requirements, she said, such as when health-care institutions require vaccinations during particularly bad flu seasons. Koch said she was “encouraged by the fact that this was dismissed as quickly and expeditiously as it was.”
Veronica Vargas Stidvent, executive director at the Center for Women in Law at the University of Texas School of Law, said the ruling is based on employment law in Texas, so the extent to which it sets a precedent for other jurisdictions is not clear.
“At least here in Texas, under this ruling, it’s pretty clear employers can require employees to get vaccinated,” she said.
Bridges, who previously worked in Houston Methodist’s covid unit, told The Post last month that she has willingly submitted to “every vaccine known to man.” But she insists the coronavirus vaccines need further study.
In an interview with USA Today following her lawsuit’s dismissal, Bridges said she was not surprised by the judge’s decision. The nurse, who has raised more than $100,000 for her legal battle on GoFundMe, said she would not give up despite the case being thrown out.
“We knew this was going to be a huge fight,” she said, “and we are prepared to fight it.”
Jared Woodfill, the Houston-area attorney and conservative activist who filed the suit, said he plans to appeal the ruling, repeating the complaint’s claim that the vaccine requirement forces employees to serve as guinea pigs. He said in written comments that he believes the hospital system will ultimately “be held accountable for their conduct.”
In a statement released by the hospital system, Boom said the judge’s decision meant Houston Methodist “can now put this behind us and continue our focus on unparalleled safety, quality, service and innovation.”
Master Slave Jabployment, Ignored Health Risks, Magnetic Hydrogel Irony, Global Guinea Pig Gulag
Indian Bar Association Sues WHO for Lying About Ivermectin and Killing Indians — Will Fauci and CDC Be Next?
It’s been over a year since the WHO declared the coronavirus a pandemic after originally downplaying the viral threat. It is no secret that both the disease and the response to combat it following this SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in late 2019 have turned our world upside-down. Mandates, lockdowns, and guidelines seem to change every time Dr. Fauci opens his mouth. All of these unprecedented rules were put into place, we were told, to stop the spread of a disease that today is linked to the death of over half a million Americans in just over a year.
You would think that a disease that is a death sentence for the elderly, the obese, those with preexisting conditions, and that has forced children to avoid school, mask up, and get vaccinated would have certainly been faced with ramped-up research into prophylactic and therapeutic solutions since its arrival to the United States.
One would think that after all this time there would be a consensus in the hospitals, in the nursing homes, and in other treatment centers on how to treat a Covid positive patient or resident. This is not the case.
There still is no agreed upon treatment plan for elderly patients who catch coronavirus to assist in their recovery.
And Dr. Fauci and the CDC blocked use of proven treatments, including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, that could have saved tens of thousands of American lives.
The Indian Bar Association sued the WHO Chief for preventing use of ivermectin that would have saved millions of lives.
Could this happen in America? Are Dr. Fauci and the CDC next?
The Indian Bar Association (IBA) sued WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan on May 25, accusing her in a 71-point brief of causing the deaths of Indian citizens by misleading them about Ivermectin. There is also an updated legal notice on June 13, 2021.
Point 56 states, “That your misleading tweet on May 10, 2021, against the use of Ivermectin had the effect of the State of Tamil Nadu withdrawing Ivermectin from the protocol on May 11, 2021, just a day after the Tamil Nadu government had indicated the same for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.”
If a trial in India finds WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan guilty then the WHO Scientist could be sentenced to death or life in prison. Dr Soumya Swaminathan would have be charged with the threatened criminal prosecution and be found guilty on one of the those charges.
The Government of Tamil Nadu has published new treatment protocols for COVID-19 patients that leaves out the use of ivermectin, which had been included in a previous version. The new protocols describe three categories of COVID-19 patients based on the level of care they need: home-based, primary care and pre-hospital care. It leaves hospital care out. The tests to determine the category to which a patient belongs are oxygen saturation (SpO2) and respiratory rate.
- A hospital in Houston, Texas, has suspended 178 of its staff members who have refused to abide by its mandate that employees be fully vaccinated.
- A federal judge just ruled against over 100 Houston hospital workers who will be fired if they don’t get the COVID-19 vaccine
- Can Employers Legally Mandate The COVID Vaccine To Return To Work?
- More info on The De-Program Network Brain
Show notes: Behind The Woodshed | Real Liberty Media
- DEFENDING CHILDRENS RIGHTS – CHILDRENS HEALTH DEFENCE CANADA
- World Economic Forum Releases Guide on How to Coerce and Manipulate Public into Getting the Covid-19 Vaccine
- Throwback To The Swine Flu Hoax: SAME Script, SAME Tactics, SAME Players — 10 Years Prior To COVID-19 They Tried The Same But Failed
- Rise Of Protests Swell Worldwide 2021
- Congress Receives Vaccine Safety Project Details Including Actions Needed for Sound Science and Transparency • World Mercury Project