In June 2021, the U.S. National Security Council released a brand-new “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism” document. 1 While it’s being chiefly made as a tool to fight White supremacy and political extremism, the definition of what constitutes a “domestic terrorist” is incredibly vague and based on creeds rather than specific behaviors.

It’s not difficult to imagine this policy being used to silence political resist simply by labeling anyone who disagrees with the government as a domestic gunman and billing them with a hate crime.

We’re already verifying mansions suggesting that this is the path we’re on. July 28, 2021, Dr. Peter Hotez published a paper2 in PLOS Biology designation “Mounting Antiscience Aggression in the United Regime, ” in which he hints blaming Dr. Anthony Fauci and other scientists ought to be labeled a “hate crime.” Commenting on the working paper, Paul Joseph Watson at Summit News writes: 3

“This is yet another transparent effort to dehumanize anti-lockdown objectors and demonize people who merely want to exercise bodily autonomy while elevating Fauci and his ilk to Pope-like status. Science isn’t supposed to be a religious tenet that is set in stone, it’s an ever-evolving knowledge base that changes and improves thanks to dissent and skepticism.”

Discipline Depends on Questioning and Challenging Acceptance

Attorney Jonathan Turley also responded to Hotez’s paper in an August 4, 2021, blog affix, saying: 4

“’Religion is a culture of sect; discipline is a culture of doubt.’ Feynman’s statement captivates how discipline depends upon constant query and challenging of presumptions …

[ T] here remain important debates over not just the underlying science relation to Covid-1 9 but the implications for such discipline for our policies. Criminalizing the various aspects of that debate would ratchet up the threats against those with dissenting sentiments, including some scientists. That would damage not just free speech but discipline in the long run.”

Should We Have Protected Grades That Cannot Be Questioned?

Turley likewise points out how starting scientists a protected class( and one would assume only those with specific political tilteds) is a slippery slope that will likely have cumbersome forks: 5

“The federal hate crime principles focus on basis of a person’s characteristics of race, religion, ethnicity, tribe, gender, sex orientation, and gender identity. We have experienced calls for adding professings like police officer, which I too resisted.

As with police officers, the inclusion of such professings would have a direct and inimical impact on free speech in national societies. Indeed, it would create a slippery slope as other professions challenge inclusion from reporters to executives to physicians. Hate crimes would rapidly apply to a wide array of people due to their occupations.”

Will America Accept No-Fly List for Unvaccinated?

Writing for The Atlantic, 6 former helper secretary for Homeland Security Juliette Kayyem posits that people who do not want to be part of the COVID injection experiment “need to bear the burden” when it comes to preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

“The number of COVID-1 9 cases maintains thriving, even though remarkably safe, effective inoculations are widely available, ” Kayyem writes. 7 “Many public enterprises are responding by reimposing disguising rules on everyone.

But at the present stage of the pandemic, tougher universal restrictions are not the solution to continuing viral spread. While flying, injected parties should no longer carry the burden for unvaccinated parties.

The White House has spurned a national vaccine mandatory … but a no-fly list for unvaccinated adults is an self-evident stair that the federal government should make.

It will help limit the risk of transmission at destinations where unvaccinated people tour — and, by setting criteria that restrict particular advantages to vaccinated parties, will too cure raise the depressed vaccination rates that are saving both the economy and society from fully recovering.”

Travel Ban Identified as Effective Coercion Strategy

According to Kayyem, traveling in general and flying in particular is not a human right, and putting unvaccinated characters on a no-fly list is a matter of national security, in the sense that the country needs to protect itself from beings capable of spreading this dangerous virus.

She makes no mention of the scientifically showed happening that no one is of the COVID shots actually prevent you from getting fouled, and that “vaccinated” someones carry the same viral quantity as the unvaccinated, 8,9 which means they’re just as infectious. The main difference is that vaccinated characters might not realize that they’re carriers, as the primary influence when the infusions do work is lessening symptoms of infection.

Kayyem too quotes a New York Times and Kaiser Family Foundation poll in which 41% of unvaccinated respondents had said prohibition on airline proceed would sway their decision, including 11% of those “adamantly opposed” to vaccination. In other terms, where free doughnuts and million-dollar gambles have failed to coerce parties to get the shot, an airline advance proscribe might do the trick.

Despite her former arrangement within government, she makes no mention of laws forbidding coercion of medical volunteers, such as the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 46( subpart A, the Belmont report ), 10 the Covenant on civil and political rights on Civil and Political Rights treaty, 11 the Declaration of Helsinki1 2 or the Nuremberg Code. 13 Supreme court rulings have also clarified that Americans have the right to choose their own health care in general. 14,15

Reframing to Confuse the Issue

Kayyem suggests thwarting such basic human rights by reframing the question. She writes: 16

“The public debate about impelling vaccination a precondition for travel, job, and other activities has described this approach as vaccine authorizations, a period that … therefore seems that unvaccinated parties are being prescribed around arbitrarily.

What is actually going on, largely, is that institutions are altering loads to unvaccinated people … rather than imposing greater burdens on everyone.

Americans still have a choice to go unvaccinated, but that aims giving up on certain societal benefits. Nobody has a constitutional privilege to attend The Lion King on Broadway or work at Disney or Walmart … People who still want to wait and see about the vaccines can continue doing so. They simply can’t maintain propagandizing all the costs on everyone else.”

As pointed out by Swift Headline, 17 the owner of Atlantic magazine, Laurene Powell Jobs, the billionaire widow of Steve Jobs, owns two private flows herself, committing her the freedom of the media to fly around the world at will, regardless what vaccine mandates might be in place. Many other ultra-rich characters would also be able to ignore the rules due to wealth alone, basically turning them into a protected class. Swift Headline points out this projection: 18

“The Atlantic went on to say unvaccinated people who are exercising their individual freedoms as free Americans’ do not deserve’ to be a’ protected class’ …

Jobs’s wealth and class status is detailed in Breitbart News’ Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow’s book,’ Breaking the News: Exposing the Establishment Media’s Hidden Deals and Secret Corruption, ’ which’ exposes the obscured connections between the establishment media and the activist left.’

As Marlow items, Jobs’s past is a privileged one … Jobs’ married well and acquired a great deal of money, and her money is tied up in some of world’s biggest business, ’ Marlow continues.’ She is the establishment.’”

The Price of Admission to Society

August 2, 2021, the San Francisco Chronicle also published an opinion piece1 9 by the Chronicle editorial board, in which they hinted we ought to “Make vaccination the price of admission to society.” One lane to evaluate the reasonableness of such a proposition is to replace COVID “vaccination” with anything else. How about: “Make proof of contraception use the price of admission to forbids and nightclubs.”

“Make clear scalp the price of admission to gyms and public swimming pools.” “Make being taller than 5’ 9” the price of admission to theme parks.” “Make having a BMI below 25 the price of admission to airline flights.” “Make proof of not having an illness the price of admission to in-hospital care.”

According to the Chronicle editorial board, “the unvaccinated account for over 95% of hospitalizations and deaths.”2 0 The card does not quote where it get that data from, so let’s review the source of that data.

In an August 5, 2021, video testimony, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky noted that this statistic was obtained by looking at hospitalization and death data from January through June 2021 — a timeframe during which the overwhelming majority of the United Regime population were unvaccinated.

The narrative that we’re in a’ pandemic of the unvaccinated’ was created by abusing statistics from a time period when the U.S. as a whole was largely unvaccinated. When you look at more recent data, present trends is shaking in the opposite direction.

January 1, 2021, simply 0.5% of the U.S. person had received a COVID shot. By mid-April, an estimated 31% had received one or more shots, 21 and as of June 15, 48.7% were fully “vaccinated.”2 2

The CDC has also pointed out that you are not considered “fully vaccinated” until two weeks after your second dose( in the case of Pfizer or Moderna ), which is given six weeks after your first shot. 23 This meant that if you receive your first dosage on June 1, you won’t be “fully vaccinated” until eight weeks later, around August 1.

So, the narrative that we’re in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” was created by abusing statistics from periods of time when the U.S. as a whole was largely unvaccinated. When you look at more recent data, the trend is shaking in the opposite direction.

Vaccinated Now Comprise the Bulk of Hospitalizations

For example, August 1, 2021, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, superintendent of Israel’s Public Health Work, announced half of all COVID-1 9 infections were among the perfectly inoculated. 24

A few days later, August 5, Dr. Kobi Haviv, conductor of the Herzog Hospital in Jerusalem, appeared on Channel 13 News, reporting that 95% of severely ill COVID-1 9 cases are amply injected, and that they make up 85% to 90% of COVID related hospitalizations overall. 25

In Scotland, official data on hospitalizations and deaths show 87% of those who have died from COVID-1 9 in the third wave that began in early July were inoculated, 26 and in Gibraltar, which has a 99% COVID jab compliance rate, COVID clients have risen by 2,500% since June 1, 2021.27

A CDC investigation of an outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts between July 6 through July 25, 2021, determined 74% of those who received a diagnosis of COVID1 9, and 80% of hospitalizations, were among the perfectly inoculated. 28,29 Most, but not all, had the Delta variant.

“What the breakthrough examples appear to show is that the delta variant of the coronavirus is more easily carried and transmitted by vaccinated people than its predecessors, ” the Chronicle editorial board writes. 30

“In any case, the greater apparent transmissibility of the variant makes it that much more important to protect as numerous parties as is practicable from severe COVID by increasing inoculation rates.”

What the board appears to be saying is that unvaccinated people must be protected against severe infection, against their will, if required in order, and the best way to do that is to discriminate against them and treat them like second-class citizens.

Again, a simple way to check the reasonableness of this argument is to swap out the COVID reference for something else. How about, “It’s important to protect as many people as possible from dying in gondola accidents by raising vehicle rates so fewer people can get behind the wheel.”

Can’ Big Brother’ Save You From a Virus?

As early as April 2020, The Times in the U.K. weighed in with similar suggestions, territory “We need Big Brother to beat this virus.”3 1 Clare Foges, the author of the bit in question, went on to say, “Don’t make the political liberty lobby blind us given the fact that greater territory surveillance, including ID cards, is required.”

The argument that Big Brother can protect us from illnes is silly on its face, because no quantity of parties surveillance can avoid microscopic viruses from circulating.

The No. 1 home of viral spread is in institutions, such as nursing homes and hospitals, hitherto the staff within them are among the most well-trained in pathogenic self-restraint. If qualified hospital organization can’t prevent the spread of viruses, how can government officials do it?

Importantly, the reason that we need vaccine passports to prove we’re “clean” enough to participate in society immediately falls apart when you take into account the fact that the COVID shots do not provide immunity. You can still be infected, carry the virus and spread it to others.

We’ve already seen several examples of situations where 100% of people were fully “vaccinated” against COVID-1 9 hitherto an eruption arose. We’ve even recognized over 100 fully COVID inserted beings die from COVID in one state alone, Massachusetts, 32 so it is likely there are now many thousands of fully “vaccinated” who have died from COVID.

Even a 100% Vaccination Rate Cannot Eliminate COVID

Most recently, Carnival cruise lines knew an eruption despite every last person on that ship having proof of COVID “vaccination.”3 3 The cruise liner had even intentionally shortened capacity from 4,000 to 2,800 to provide ample social distancing ability. None of the measures use. People got sick anyway, which spawns perfect impression if you be reminded that the shot doesn’t provide immunity, merely symptom reduction.

Cases such as these clearly reveal that even if everyone gets the shot, SARS-CoV-2 will mutate and continue to circulate, making beings out here and there. To think that giving up basic rights and freedoms is the answer simply isn’t logical. Taking responsibility for your own health is, and that includes deciding if and how you want to protect yourself from SARS-CoV-2.

Not everyone is deathly afraid of COVID-1 9. Many realize there are safe and effective treatments available, such as the Front Line COVID-1 9 Critical Care Alliance’s I-MASS Prevention and At-Home Treatment protocol and I-MASK+ Early Outpatient Treatment etiquette.

Nebulized hydrogen peroxide can also be used for prevention and treatment of COVID-1 9, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper3 4 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” And if there’s effective therapy, there’s little need to risk permanent side effects from an experimental gene technology that can only render a shrink range of protecting the first place.

Read more: