CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEY DECLARES COUNTY A “SANCTUARY FOR WORSHIP & PRAISE IN CHURCH”

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2020/08/11/calif-district-attorney-declares-county-a-sanctuary-for-worship-and-praise-in-church-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

PASO ROBLES, Calif. — A district attorney in California recently declared his county a “sanctuary for worship and praise in church.”

A video posted to YouTube shows San Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow speaking at an Independence Day gathering in Paso Robles, where he spoke about his concerns regarding the state ban on singing during indoor church services due to possible transmission of the coronavirus.

“I’m proud that each one of us has our right to worship in the way that we want to,” he stated. “Our state over the last few years has been letting out people out of prisons early, back into our communities — and especially right now — but yet our governor wants to make it a crime to worship and praise God in church by singing to our almighty God.”

“And that to me is an example of where right has become wrong and wrong has become right,” Dow said.

To cheers, he then declared San Obispo a “sanctuary city” to praise God in church.

“I’ll tell you right now for the first time with a microphone: By the power vested in me as District Attorney of San Luis Obispo County, I declare San Luis Obispo County a sanctuary county for worship and praise in church,” Dow proclaimed.

“When we’re releasing the real criminals into our community but we’re trying to criminalize those that are dedicated to exercising their First Amendment rights, we’ve gone wrong, and I won’t allow that to happen in San Luis Obispo County while I’m the district attorney.”

As previously reported, on July 6, the California Department of Health (DOH) released guidelines pertaining to “places of worship, providers of religious services and cultural ceremonies.”

The document explained that there have been outbreaks in “a range of workplaces,” which include places of worship, hospitals, food production facilities and warehouses, and that it is imperative that preventative measures be taken to protect workers and the public.

“Even with adherence to physical distancing, convening in a congregational setting of multiple different households to practice a personal faith carries a relatively higher risk for widespread transmission of the COVID-19 virus, and may result in increased
rates of infection, hospitalization, and death, especially among more vulnerable populations,” the document stated.

“In particular, activities such as singing and chanting negate the risk reduction achieved through six feet of physical distancing,” it asserted.

Therefore, “[p]laces of worship must … discontinue indoor singing and chanting activities and limit indoor attendance to 25% of building capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees, whichever is lower,” the DOH said.

Read the document in full here.

Three churches in the state have filed suit to challenge the prohibition, contending that “[t]he worship ban … on its face and as applied prohibits all singing and chanting in places of worship, even if Plaintiffs follow Center for Disease Control and Prevention and state guidelines for social distancing and mask wearing etc., which is a violation of Plaintiffs’ right to the free exercise of religion.”

Dow also released a video on July 31, explaining that he still stands behinds his words declaring San Obispo a sanctuary city where Christians can freely sing in church.

“I am firmly committed to the principle that it would be a severe injustice for my office to charge a person with a crime who has simply chosen to practice their faith by singing in church,” he said. “Today in 2020, more than ever, we need more people attending their houses of worship and seeking help from the Almighty for an answer to the coronavirus.”

Dow was soon criticized by the San Obispo Tribune editorial board, which wrote in an op-ed that his statements were a “terrible message to send at a time when coronavirus cases are soaring; it legitimizes the idea that some public health rules are questionable and gives the public tacit permission to break the law.”

Some reports state that violations of the DOH guidelines did not carry criminal penalties.

California currently prohibits indoor church services altogether in a number of counties.



SILENCE IS LOSS OF FREEDOM, LIBERTY & LIFE

Where are the leading voices who thrive on “liberal” values of logic, reason and free speech?

BY  Phil Orenstein and Jerry Matacotta

SEE: https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/08/silence-loss-freedom-liberty-and-life-frontpagemagcom;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

[Above: Vickie Paladino, President of the Whitestone Republican Club, spoke at rally to Save Teddy Roosevelt’s statue, in front of the American Museum of Natural History on Sunday June 28th.  Photo credit: Phil Orenstein.]

The “liberal” Democrat Party has been taken over by the Taliban Marxists who do not subscribe to the rule of law and classical liberal values which form the founding principles of America. This Marxist movement is not unlike the Taliban’s cultural genocide and destruction of ancient art and statues, burning books, and outlawing music, as the fulfillment of Koranic law to cleanse pre-Islamic culture and history of forbidden representations of living things. 

American founding principles and classical liberal thought were based upon the Age of Enlightenment heritage of reason and individual liberty which laid the groundwork for our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

The people of America are all immigrants of every race, religion, and national origin, with equal and unlimited opportunities protected under the law, for all to pursue the American Dream and unleash their greatest potential, and these are the basic principles that keep us functioning as a nation. This is the glue that keeps us together.

We’ve had our differences of opinion regarding policy throughout our history, as expressed by the broad diversity of such political parties as Democrat, Republican, Independence, Conservative, Libertarian, Whig, Federalist, and so on since our founding. But all these diverse political parties, ideas and philosophies subscribed to our basic belief in reason from the Enlightenment, the rule of law, and were bound by our Constitution and the founding principles of America.

Our historical heroes from George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, to Martin Luther King, belonged to various political parties, but all believed in America, our founding principles and were embraced as our greatest American heroes. Their heroism came from their faith, courage and steadfast belief in freedom and the principles of America. Their heroic stature represents the very spirit of America.

In stark contrast to America and our founding principles have been the distinct ideological opposites of the Russian Revolution of 1917 led by Lenin, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi takeover of Germany in 1933, and Mao’s Cultural Revolution of 1967. The socialist devastation of Cuba and Venezuela followed the same Marxist playbook, starting with tearing down statues, destroying books and rampant censorship.

Venezuelans have been sounding a warning cry. An activist recalled the peaceful days growing up in Venezuela, when no one believed the destruction their democratic nation, once the wealthiest country in Latin America, would follow in the wake of the actions of strongman Hugo Chavez tearing down historical statues and changing street names to eradicate their country’s history and identity and usher in socialism. Then came the changes in school curriculum, censorship of the press, movies, museums, and religious symbols, and trashing books to pave the way to the present dictatorship on the brink of collapse where 94% of Venezuelans live in wretched poverty

All of these Marxist revolutionary movements have as their basic foundation the denial of democracy and individual rights. They believe democracy is wrong, capitalism is wrong, freedom is wrong, religious liberty is wrong, and most important they believe the Enlightenment based on individual rights, reason and logic is fundamentally flawed.

They believe in an authoritarian society based on censorship and the destruction of history, where alternate views are forbidden. They silence any opinions that are not in accordance with their rigid narrative from the pages of their “Little Red Book.” Under Mao’s Cultural Revolution, this narrative was the only thought allowed. They silence and crush anyone with a different view. High on the thrill of revolution, they systematically destroy every remnant of the wicked past before they can usher in their life-destroying revolutionary state.

Does all this sound familiar to the tactics of Black Lives Matter, Antifa and the revolutionary communist groups that make up the woke mob tearing our country apart?

My question is, where are the “liberal” historians who up until three months ago were defending America and our national heroes? Where is Harold Holzer, one of the nation’s leading authorities on Abraham Lincoln, as the mob rages against Lincoln statues? Where is Steven Spielberg who’s widely acclaimed film, Lincoln recounts the full measure of President Lincoln’s passion, humanity, and political skill to end the Civil War and permanently abolish slavery through the 13th Amendment? Where is Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson scholar, Patricia O’Toole, noticeably absent from the recent “Save Teddy” rally at the American Museum of Natural History? Where are Jefferson scholars Peter Onuf and Annette Gordon-Reed, as Thomas Jefferson statues are being torn down and vandalized? Where is Jon Meacham, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book on Andrew Jackson, as protesters recently targeted the Andrew Jackson statue in Lafayette Square?

Credit is due to those precious few historians and leading public figures who have spoken out amid the woke backlash, like Civil War and Lincoln scholars, Allen C. Guelzo and James Hankins, who explained the historical truth behind the origins of the Emancipation Memorial, the statue of Lincoln and a freed slave in Washington D.C., targeted for removal. A handful of others have boldly spoken out against the rule of the mob, including Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue, who defended President Trump and American values and were vilified for it. A group of brave frontline doctors spoke out on Capitol Hill challenging the so-called accepted dogma on Covid and Hydroxychloriquine, and the video quickly went viral to millions of viewers, before they were summarily censored and cancelled by Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and all rest.

But where are all the others? Where are the multitude of leading voices?

Where are the artists, playwrights, writers, journalists who believe in and thrive on our “liberal” values of logic, reason and free speech, free expression, free press, and freedom from government censorship and repression? Where are our eminent religious leaders, now that the wrath of the mob has turned against our religious liberties, burning down and vandalizing our historic churches and religious statues throughout the country? Anarchists burned Bibles in front of the federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon. Where are the voices of our political leaders especially our representatives in Congress, speaking out for our embattled law enforcement personnel and for preserving our American way of life, when it is being torn asunder all around us? Where are their voices?

Logic, reason, and critical thinking have always been our building blocks. One of the most basic principles that was built into the moral fabric of our country, was the maxim that although we disagreed, we protected and defended each other’s right to express differences of opinion. However, if you say anything about BLM, that is contrary to the woke doctrine, all logic and reason is thrown out the window. If you say “All Lives Matter” or any opinion at odds with their Little Red Book, you could be vilified, shamed, and cancelled, lose your job, lose you circle of friends, and your personal safety and security could be at stake.

After our statues and monuments are torn down, next they will come after our books. The final step of the Russian Revolution, Nazi takeover, the Cultural Revolution, and all the others, after the book burning, confiscation of firearms, purges from jobs and social circles, was the people losing their lives.

We always think, as Americans, things like this can never happen here. We are just like our innocent and naïve friends from Venezuela who never believed the ruin of their prosperous country could ever happen. It can happen in Germany, Russia, China, Cambodia, and Cuba, but never here in America.

But if good people don’t speak up, it can happen here just as easily as any other country which succumbed to tyranny and went hurtling down the road to genocide. The worse crime that Americans can commit is to be silent, because if you’re silent, evil will take over and you’ll lose your freedom and even your life. The oft-quoted Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Black Lives Matter is a Marxist movement intent on creating chaos and upheaval to overthrow our government and destroy America. If you don’t agree with them, you are sub-human. But the vast majority of Americans don’t believe in their agenda. Are we that afraid as a nation to stand up to them?

Everyone must stand up, speak out and be not afraid. You’re an American. When you stand up for our country and declare “all American lives matter,” you’re not a bad person. You’re not a racist, sexist, or homophobe. If we remain silent, and don’t get out to vote in November for President Trump and Republicans in massive numbers, and spread the word to our family and friends, the next step will be book burning. After that will be taking people’s lives.

This election is not about Trump vs. Biden. It’s about stopping a political party and lawless mob from turning America into a socialist country and destroying our American way of life. Most Americans view the violent anti-police protesters as criminals and abhor the radical agenda of BLM, Antifa and the lawless mob. The vast majority of Americans of all races are against defunding the police. Never be silent. All good people must stand up to save America.

Phil Orenstein is the president of the Queens Village Republican Club. Established in 1875, it is America’s oldest Republican Club.  www.QVGOP.org. Historian, Jerry Matacotta, founder of History Seminar Series at Queensborough Community College was the advisor for this article.

 

 

WHY DID BIDEN PICK KAMALA HARRIS? FOLLOW THE MONEY

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/08/why-did-biden-pick-kamala-follow-money-daniel-greenfield;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

How much did it cost to buy Biden's VP Spot? About $3.5 million.

That's how much Senator Kamala Harris' virtual fundraiser for Biden brought in back in June.

That not only beat Hillary’s total, but swamped every other Democrat fundraiser for Biden, except the Obama one, which brought in over $6 million for his old incontinent flunky, and Warren, who brought in more money in total, but had the misfortune of being a white woman.

The virtual fundraisers were the real beauty contest for the money hungry Bidens. And Kamala Harris won them in a swimsuit of money long before the official announcement was even made.

Susan Rice could hardly compete with a paltry $24,000 donation to Biden.

"She’s been a fighter and a principled leader and I know because I’ve seen her up close, and I’ve seen her in the trenches," Biden gushed about the California politician.

The trenches that Biden had in mind weren’t in the fields of France, but at high-end fundraisers.

Another one of Kamala’s virtual fundraisers for Biden in July brought in another million.

It’s been estimated that Kamala raised a total of $5 million for Biden.

What was Kamala's secret? She's plugged into a network of wealthy donors who got her to the Senate. And then poured over $40 million into her failed presidential campaign.

The fundraisers showed Biden what Kamala could bring to the party. And it wasn’t just money.

A Kamala fundraiser for Biden featured Diplo, DJ D-Nice, Jermaine Dupri and DJ Cassidy. It probably doesn't hurt that Kamala's husband is an entertainment industry lawyer.

It wasn’t just Willie Brown who got Kamala to the top. It was money.

Kamala had built her political career on tapping into big money in San Francisco and then statewide. She routinely outspent her opponents in her political campaigns. In 2016, she bought the Senate race by raising over $15 million and outspending her opponent almost 4 to 1.

More than half of her presidential campaign was funded by $23 million in large contributions.

That, and not small donors, is what Biden has been running on. After Kamala Harris dropped out, the Biden campaign "aggressively" pursued her donors. Now he doesn't need to. After the DNC’s clown car primary with its obsession with small donors, the jackass party is jettisoning the pretense that it cares about anything other than big donors and their giant wads of cash.

As CNBC notes, "her addition to the ticket could help push the Biden campaign over the top in the cash race with Trump."

Michael Kempner, a top Democrat donor and the head of one of the country’s biggest PR firms, gushed, "she has a strong and active fundraising organization. She will be an important and immediate addition to the Biden fundraising effort. She is a fundraising star.”

It’s about the money. It was always about the money.

Did anyone seriously think that Biden would pick Stacey Abrams, Rep. Karen Bass, or Susan Rice, when he can marry Mrs. Moneybags for her money and the donors that come with it?

Once Team Biden decided that they had to have a black woman in the second spot, there was only one that came with sacks of money. And there was only one who could tap into the massive reserves of California cash that has been used to transform elections nationwide.

Biden vowed to pick a black woman to represent the black community, but he cynically ended up picking a politician with few ties to the black community, but lots of ties to big white money.

Wall Street executives are already cheering the pick. So is Hollywood.

And the black community got played.

But what else is new?

The Democrats picked the daughter of an Indian doctor who was raised in Montreal and claims that her favorite band is “Salt and Pepper” as the new big step forward for African-Americans. They disregarded the almost universal opposition to Kamala’s candidacy by the Congressional Black Caucus, and by virtually every black activist within their own party, because of the money.

The Biden campaign told black Democrats that Kamala’s money matters more than they do.

And black Democrats will be expected to back Kamala up as she spends the entire campaign accusing President Trump and Republicans of racism and sexism for opposing her. These accusations will ring hollow among black voters, just as they did when Kamala was lobbing them at Biden. They fell flat when Kamala tried to keep her campaign going by accusing the entire primary field and the Democrat electorate of racism and sexism for not picking her.

Biden supposedly picked Kamala to appeal to black voters, but he beat her among black voters.

Toward the end of her campaign, Kamala was only polling at 4% among black voters while 20% had an unfavorable view of her.

But the Biden-Harris campaign is ready to reboot the racism and sexism charge all over again as it deploys the liar who accused him of racism to falsely smear President Trump as a racist.

The question that President Trump ought to ask is was Kamala lying then or is she lying now?

Before the official announcement, the Biden campaign was already officially coordinating with the abortion groups, that have killed countless black babies, and Emily's List, to smear Republicans and the Trump campaign as sexist and racist for criticising Kamala Harris.

Meanwhile, when Biden's VP search committee asked her about accusing the man at the top of racism, she allegedly, "laughed and said, ‘that’s politics.’"

That’s the level of contempt that Senator Kamala Harris has for the serious charge of racism. All those stories about her plight in “segregated” Berkeley while growing up as the daughter of wealthy upper class parents were a cynical political joke. And black people didn’t buy into it.

The question is whether black voters will buy into it when they’re aimed at Republicans. And whether they’ll let themselves be used as fronts for more false exploitation of racism by Kamala

Joe Biden showed that he cares more about white donors than black voters. And that what he really cares about isn’t race, even as he’s trying to use Kamala’s assumed racial identity to play on white guilt and racial idealism, but money. That’s all the Biden family has ever cared about.

And if this is how Biden is treating the black community before the election when he actually needs their votes, imagine how he’ll treat them afterward when he doesn’t need them anymore.

 

 

WHY AMERICA IS IN REAL DANGER

BY DENNIS PRAGER

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/columns/dennis-prager/2020/08/11/why-america-is-in-real-danger-n772970;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Americans have long been proud of the fact that, unlike European countries, America never went the route of totalitarianism as embodied in communism, fascism and Nazism.

This achievement may be coming to an end.

In order to understand why, it is first necessary to understand why European countries embraced — or fell victim to — totalitarian doctrines.

Until World War I, the primary beliefs that gave life meaning, both on a national and personal level, were Judeo-Christian religions and patriotism (love of one’s nation). What gave people moral guidance were Judeo-Christian values.

For most Europeans of the younger generation, World War I, with its seemingly senseless slaughter of millions, ended belief in Christianity and, in many cases, ended the people’s faith in their nations. God was deemed absent; religion was deemed unnecessary; and national identity was widely seen as a cause of the war.

That left a void that was almost immediately filled by communism, fascism and Nazism.

In Russia, World War I led directly to the Russian Revolution. Even before the war ended, in 1917, the czar was overthrown, and later that year, the Bolsheviks (the Russian communists) took over. As awful as the czar was, there was far more freedom under him than there was in the Soviet Union until the fall of communism 72 years later, not to mention the murder of more people — 20 to 40 million — under the Soviet regime.

In Italy, the rise of fascism followed World War I. And in Germany, the Nazis came to power just 15 years after the end of the Great War. Nazism conquered most of the European continent during WWII, and after Germany’s defeat in 1945, the Soviets imposed communism over all of Eastern Europe.

Though there were communists, communist fellow travelers, Nazi sympathizers, racists and anti-Semites in the United States, neither communism nor fascism nor Nazism took root here. The primary reason was that, unlike most Europeans, Americans did not lose their faith in Judeo-Christian religions and values or in America after World War I. America remained so religious that, in 1954, the words “under God” were inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily in American schools.

However, by the 1950s, faith in America, Christianity and what we call bourgeois middle-class values was largely limited to older Americans. The post-World War II baby-boomer generation was already being indoctrinated in secularism and anti-Americanism. As early as 1962, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school prayer was unconstitutional.

By the late 1960s, vast numbers of baby boomers were attending demonstrations that were as much against America — routinely characterized as an imperialist and colonialist aggressor country with an evil military — as they were against the war in Vietnam. It was not uncommon to see America spelled “Amerikkka” or “Amerika” at protests and in graffiti.

When I was in graduate school at Columbia University in the early 1970s, I was taught that men and women are not inherently different from one another and that the Cold War was between two superpowers (equally at fault), not between freedom and tyranny.

Another generation has passed, and the post-Christian, left-wing baby boomers have come close to achieving complete success. The mainstream print and electronic media, universities, high schools and elementary schools, the arts and now sports have all been conquered by the left. Except for sports, from the beginning of the 20th century, they were almost all liberal, but now they are left.

We now have the answer to the question: What will happen to America if Americans lose faith in God and country as the Europeans did after World War I? What will happen to America when Christianity dies as it did in Europe after World War I?

The way things now look, America may have its bout with some totalitarian doctrine — almost surely some form of leftism. Liberty has never been a left-wing value. From Lenin on, wherever the left has come to power, it has suppressed liberty, beginning with free speech. Already, despite a Republican president and a Republican Senate, America has less free speech than at any time in its history. Exactly one year ago, I testified before a Senate subcommittee and wrote an op-ed piece for The Wall Street Journal about YouTube (owned by Google) placing more than 100 Prager University, or PragerU, videos on its restricted list.

And things have gotten much worse. Last week, PragerU was locked out of its Twitter account for retweeting a press conference of eight physicians in Washington, D.C., which had already received 17 million views, and Facebook has just informed us that if we even cite studies that show possible benefits of hydroxychloroquine (with zinc) in the early stages of a patient with COVID-19, we will lose our Facebook account.

And then there is the “cancel culture” — which is merely a euphemism for leftist suppression of dissent. People are booted from internet platforms, fired from their jobs or have their reputations smeared and their businesses ruined for differing with the left — on anything.

We are also undergoing a nonviolent (as of now) version of Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution, with individuals forced to issue humiliating public recantations of their beliefs and attend reeducation sessions (we don’t yet have reeducation camps, but they should not be ruled out as a possibility if the left is in control).

Another communist norm taking root in America is the rewriting of the American past. We are living a famous Soviet dissident joke: “In the Soviet Union, the future is known; it is the past that is always changing.”

On almost all social issues and many economic ones, the American left is more radical than the left in Europe. Europeans across the political spectrum are more wary of ideological fanaticism because of the vast scale of death and suffering that resulted from communism, fascism and Nazism.

One might say that Europe was inoculated against fanaticism. Europeans are more preoccupied with working less, traveling more and being taken care of than with ideological movements. But America, which has not suffered under fanatical, irrational, liberty-depriving ideologies, has not been inoculated.

Without such a vaccination, what replaced Christianity in Europe may well do the same in America.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in May 2019, is “The Rational Bible,” a commentary on the book of Genesis. His film, “No Safe Spaces,” will be released to home entertainment nationwide on September 15, 2020. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.

 

SWEDEN EXPOSES PRO-LOCKDOWN COVID-19 MISINFORMATION

BY STACEY LENNOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/columns/stacey-lennox/2020/08/11/the-covid-19-misinformation-continues-about-lockdown-testing-and-spread-n774445;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The misleading narrative the corporate media tells about COVID-19—the need for increased testing and the continued references to “asymptomatic infections”—is getting ridiculous. The political motivations are clear, as left-leaning journalists beat the drum for continued lockdowns and feature only doctors who parrot their narrative.

At some point, Americans are going to wake up and figure out the narrative that has been foisted on them is misleading at best and deliberate manipulation at worst. Let’s start with Sweden. The country has been a constant source of media speculation because the Swedish government chose to pursue herd immunity. While they provided their citizens with recommendations, they never locked down and never closed primary schools.

Lies, Damn Lies, and COVID-19 Statistics

Despite the criticism Sweden took for its approach, results have not been worse than many of its neighbors. In fact, in some cases, they are better. As of Sunday, Sweden’s death rate per 100,000 people was 56.4. This rate is lower than that in the U.K. (69.9), Spain (60.8), and Italy (58.16). Italy had some of the most severe lockdowns outside of China.

Sweden’s case fatality rate was also the lowest in Europe. This metric means that for people with confirmed cases, the percent who died was the lowest. According to Worldometer, new daily cases appear to have peaked on June 29. They have continued to decline to a steady-state of between 200 and 300 per day on a rolling basis. Daily deaths have also been declining, with one reported on August 8 and none since.

In March, Stockholm stopped testing symptomatic patients unless they were hospitalized or in a high-risk group. Dagens Nyheter:

On Wednesday, Region Stockholm’s way of handling new suspected cases of the new corona virus changed. Sampling for new suspected cases will be concentrated on those who are already in hospital. Others, who are not in a risk group, will not be tested.

These are instead encouraged to stay at home and not to hang out with anyone other than the person or people you live with, says Erik Berglund.

– If you are 20 years old and strong, you have to wait out the disease.

“You who have coronavirus-like symptoms will not be tested. This applies regardless of whether you have been in the areas that have previously been exposed to infection or had close contact with someone you know is ill with covid-19 “, the region writes in a press release.

Sweden: Coronavirus and the Concept of ‘Trade-Offs’

You would think the experience of Sweden, given its low case fatality rate and approach to testing in its largest city, would interest or inform public policy in other countries. Thankfully, it has intrigued some researchers who believe they have found the answer. Several studies have shown that unexposed individuals have responsive T-cell immunity.

This immunity is different than the antibodies that current tests are looking for. These are the body’s short-term immunity that develops with a new infection.

In July, a study published in Nature sought to determine whether people exposed to SARS were immune to COVID-19. The T cells of these subjects were reactive to COVID-19. The researchers were surprised to find that subjects with no history of exposure to SARS or COVID-19 showed T-cell reactivity as well. These subjects reacted to protein fragments similar to those in coronaviruses that cause the common cold. (COVID-19 is part of a family of viruses that cause the common cold. Characterizing it as “novel” was always an overreach.)

This study confirmed the findings of additional research in April and June that found subjects not exposed to COVID-19 demonstrated active T-cell immunity to the virus. These studies show that somewhere between 40% and 60% of subjects demonstrate this T-cell reaction. This crossover immunity likely explains quite a few things that the media and their talking-head Health Experts™ aren’t telling you.

6 Questions an Honest, Intelligent Reporter Would Ask Dr. Fauci About COVID-19

First, some portion of the population is already immune. That means the number of new infections required to reach herd immunity is much lower than initially thought. Using the study estimates, somewhere between 10% and 30% would need to be infected with COVID-19 to reach the 60-70% rate epidemiologists originally projected for herd immunity.

Given that assumption, the Southeast is going through a typical disease curve that matches what was seen in Sweden and other countries. Georgia, Florida, and Texas are all moving through that curve. If the CDC estimate of confirmed cases needs to be multiplied by ten to get the actual infection rate, then Georgia and Florida are hovering at around 20% and 24%, respectively. Texas, which reimposed some restrictions, is lagging a bit at approximately 17%.

Next, this explains why the virus impacted the elderly and not children and those who were younger. T-cell immunity degrades with advanced age:

T cells play an important role in the body’s immune response to viral infections and tumors, but T cell immunity wanes as we age, thus increasing our susceptibility to these diseases.

This type of immunity could also mean that vaccinations for COVID-19 may look more like those for the flu. Prioritizing the elderly and at-risk would be necessary. Herd immunity does not entirely stop a virus from spreading, but it prevents it from spreading quickly. It is likely that cases will become part of the flu-like illnesses that the CDC tracks yearly.

Despite this research, you still see commentators saying things like this:

The constant demand for new testing is just to drive up case numbers in order to keep you scared and compliant. We know this from the CDC’s website. Whether a person has T-cell immunity or successfully recovers from an infection, they may have virus particles in their nasal passages for up to 90 days. Getting tested in the absence of symptoms is of very little value:

Available data indicate that persons with mild to moderate COVID-19 remain infectious no longer than 10 days after symptom onset. Persons with more severe to critical illness or severe immunocompromise likely remain infectious no longer than 20 days after symptom onset.  Recovered persons can continue to shed detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in upper respiratory specimens for up to 3 months after illness onset, albeit at concentrations considerably lower than during illness, in ranges where replication-competent virus has not been reliably recovered and infectiousness is unlikely.

There is no data in the recommendations that indicate a person without symptoms has a viral concentration high enough to pass the virus to others. Yet the idea of the asymptomatic superspreader persists.

However, an asymptomatic person can test positive. This false positive can occur because the PCR test is so sensitive. It can pick up pieces of RNA in a virus particle that have been neutralized by an individual’s T-cell immunity, just as it can in a patient who has symptoms and developed antibodies to neutralize the virus.

The Good News the Media and Our Health Experts™ Are Hiding About COVID-19

The CDC guidance also states that retesting an asymptomatic individual in the 90 days following symptomatic infection is not likely to yield useful results:

If such a person remains asymptomatic during this 90-day period, then any re-testing is unlikely to yield useful information, even if the person had close contact with an infected person.

Yet employers, schools, and other institutions are still requiring retesting to return after symptomatic disease or exposure without symptoms.

This information should make us question why people need to be tested in the absence of symptoms at all. Especially since COVID-19 has a pretty reliable sign that is notable in the six identified courses of the illness: the loss of smell. If you have flu-like symptoms and can’t smell anything, get a test. If you are exposed, quarantine as recommended. The CDC is currently saying onset of symptoms may occur 2-14 days after exposure, so two full weeks is likely what a school or employer should require.

However, testing just to test may be leading to false positives. The CDC’s advice says the tests being used can pick up virus particles incapable of replicating or causing an infection. At this point, retests are not counted separately from initial tests in any dashboard I can find. The persistent RNA particles detectable in a recovered patient are also increasing positive tests.

It is incredible that the CDC’s page, updated in mid-July, makes no mention of the studies related to T-cell immunity. However, this information should have every American questioning lockdown restrictions of any kind, masking mandates for people without symptoms, and unnecessary tests. Our Health Experts™ have some new questions to answer if we could find a courageous reporter to ask.

‘Airborne’ By Matt Margolis Is the Definitive Guide to the Media’s COVID-19 Malfeasance and Malpractice


JENNA ELLIS ATTACKED FOR “MISGENDERING” PENNSYLVANIA HEALTH SECRETARY DR. “RACHEL” LEVINE

"THIS 'GUY' IS MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT YOUR HEALTH":

BY MATT MARGOLIS

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/08/11/media-attacks-trump-campaign-advisor-for-misgendering-pennsylvanias-health-secretary-n774928;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Back in May, a Pittsburg radio station received heavy criticism after reporter Marty Griffin called Pennsylvania Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine “sir” at least three times during a media conference call.

Dr. Levine, who is biologically male but transitioned several years ago, was aghast.

“Please don’t misgender me,” Levine told Griffin, telling him it was “really insulting.” Liberal virtue-signalers predictably expressed outrage that Griffin dared to think that the obviously male-sounding Levine was a “sir.”

On Monday, Jenna Ellis, a senior legal adviser to President Trump’s campaign, referenced Levine in a tweet that read: “This guy is making decisions about your health.”

Once again, the left-wing outrage mob came out in full force to defend Levine, who is, according to The Hill, one of only a handful of openly transgender public officials in the United States.

Changing one’s sex is biologically impossible. The World Health Organization considered transgenderism a mental illness until 2018; political correctness forced them to change their position. Gender in humans and most other mammals is determined by sex chromosomes. Females have two X chromosomes, while males have an X and Y chromosome. Plastic surgery and hormone treatments do not change one’s sex chromosomes.

Nevertheless, the left attempts to bully those who don’t believe that changing one’s gender is possible by calling them bigots and accusing them of committing hate crimes.

“Jenna Ellis is a bigot and Dr. Levine is a patriot — plain and simple,” said Alphonso David, the president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) said in a statement. “Dr. Levine illustrates character and patriotism while Ellis cannot even define those terms.”

Undeterred by the attacks, Ellis told The Hill that the Human Rights Campaign “thinks it can define character and patriotism while it apparently can’t even define male and female.”

Trump Lawyer Stands Up for Christianity, BLM Leader Says It’s All About Her ‘Whiteness’

Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel responded to the so-called controversy by posting a screenshot of her tweet next to a photo of a “Trump Pride 2020” shirt.

“I have a lot of pride too that Donald Trump is your President! Great shirt,” Ellis tweeted in response. Mic drop!

Naturally, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf, who appointed Levine to his position in 2017, came to Levine’s defense:

Another criticism of Ellis came from Brad Polumbo, a contributor at the Washington Examiner. “Gross behavior,” he said of Ellis’s tweet. “If you have substantive criticisms of the PA health secretary’s handling of COVID-19, it’s not hard to make them without taking cheap ad-hominem shots.”

The problem with Polumbo’s comment is that Levine’s transgender status has insulated him from criticism for his policies which have resulted in thousands of unnecessary deaths in the state. Like New York, Pennsylvania ordered long-term care facilities to admit coronavirus-positive patients despite warnings that it would unnecessarily cost lives. Approximately 67 percent of Pennsylvania’s COVID-19 deaths are linked to state-licensed long-term care facilities. That’s on Levine. He should have resigned or been fired. I suspect that Governor Wolf figured that making Levine the fall guy for the policy would be more damaging to him politically (because Levine is transgender) than keeping him on as health secretary and defending the policy.

Trump Lawyer Calls Impeachment a ‘Direct Attack Against Our Constitution’

But the policy itself is only part of the story.

While Governor Andrew Cuomo tried to cover up the full extent of New York’s deadly policy forcing long-term care facilities to accept coronavirus-positive patients, Dr. Levine enforced his state’s policy while also pulling his 95-year-old mother out of such a facility during the outbreak—an undeniable admission that his policy had deadly consequences.

“My mother requested and my sister and I, as her children, complied to move her to another location during the COVID-19 outbreak,” Levine said during a press conference in May. “My mother is 95 years old. She is very intelligent and more than competent to make her own decisions,” he added.

According to a Pennsylvania Department of Health spokeswoman, Dr. Levine’s family had been made aware of residents at the facility testing positive for COVID-19 when the mother was removed. Both the deadly policy and Levine’s moving his mother out of the facility were criticized by those who noted that other families did not have the same options to do so, be it due to financial or logistical reasons, or because public health officials advised against moving elderly family members out of those facilities into multi-generational homes, where they believed they were at a higher risk of infection.

Of course, Levine has managed to be shielded from criticism and calls for his resignation because of his transgender status.

Dr. Levine was born Richard Levine in 1957. He made the decision to “transition” in 2011. He was previously married and has two children.

Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital, has said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” meriting mental health treatment, and that those who promote sex reassignment surgery are enabling that disorder. As McHugh explained, it’s disordered for an individual to believe he or she is different from the biological reality of the body. McHugh compared it to anorexia, where “dangerously thin” individuals believe themselves to be overweight. In that situation, we acknowledge that the person is suffering from mental illness.

Bottom line: Dr. Levine shouldn’t be making decisions about the health of Pennsylvania residents. He mandated long-term care facilities accept coronavirus-positive patients, resulting in a huge outbreak of COVID-19 in the state amongst that population, while at the same time taking his mother out of such a facility. Levine’s gender dysphoria should disqualify him from having any role as a public health official.



ANTI-LOCKDOWN DR. SCOTT ATLAS JOINS CORONAVIRUS TASK FORCE: IS FAUCI FINALLY OUT?

BY MEGAN FOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2020/08/11/anti-lockdown-dr-scott-atlas-joins-coronavirus-task-force-is-fauci-finally-out-n776616;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

President Trump announced Monday that Dr. Scott Atlas is joining the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Dr. Atlas is a former chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center and a senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. Before joining the team, Atlas penned an op-ed in The Hill that showed his approach to the coronavirus outbreak is much different than that of Anthony “Chicken Little” Fauci, who favors draconian lockdowns and now wants people to wear goggles to avoid getting a virus that most people recover from easily.

Here are some excerpts of the piece Atlas wrote, titled “The data is in-stop the panic and end the isolation.”

The tragedy of the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be entering the containment phase. Tens of thousands of Americans have died, and Americans are now desperate for sensible policymakers who have the courage to ignore the panic and rely on facts. Leaders must examine accumulated data to see what has actually happened, rather than keep emphasizing hypothetical projections; combine that empirical evidence with fundamental principles of biology established for decades; and then thoughtfully restore the country to function.

Five key facts are being ignored by those calling for continuing the near-total lockdown.

Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19. The recent Stanford University antibody study now estimates that the fatality rate if infected is likely 0.1 to 0.2 percent, a risk far lower than previous World Health Organization estimates that were 20 to 30 times higher and that motivated isolation policies.

Fact 2: Protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding…Dr. Leora Horwitz of NYU Medical Center concluded “age is far and away the strongest risk factor for hospitalization.” Even early WHO reports noted that 80 percent of all cases were mild, and more recent studies show a far more widespread rate of infection and lower rate of serious illness. Half of all people testing positive for infection have no symptoms at all. The vast majority of younger, otherwise healthy people do not need significant medical care if they catch this infection.

Fact 3: Vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem…In this virus, we know that medical care is not even necessary for the vast majority of people who are infected. It is so mild that half of infected people are asymptomatic, shown in early data from the Diamond Princess ship, and then in Iceland and Italy. That has been falsely portrayed as a problem requiring mass isolation. In fact, infected people without severe illness are the immediately available vehicle for establishing widespread immunity. By transmitting the virus to others in the low-risk group who then generate antibodies, they block the network of pathways toward the most vulnerable people, ultimately ending the threat. Extending whole-population isolation would directly prevent that widespread immunity from developing.

Fact 4: People are dying because other medical care is not getting done due to hypothetical projections…An estimated 80 percent of brain surgery cases were skipped. Acute stroke and heart attack patients missed their only chances for treatment, some dying and many now facing permanent disability.

Fact 5: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected with targeted measures…it is a commonsense, achievable goal to target isolation policy to that group, including strictly monitoring those who interact with them. Nursing home residents, the highest risk, should be the most straightforward to systematically protect from infected people, given that they already live in confined places with highly restricted entry.

It’s a relief that someone with common sense may be taking a bigger role in combatting the panic response to COVID-19 that has taken over the nation. Many of us, who are not even doctors, have been saying that we need to target the elderly population for protection while the rest of us go back to reality. We were totally ignored. But Atlas is now in a position of authority to tell someone who will listen to what the right thing to do is. It isn’t more lockdowns and more isolation.

Strictly protect the known vulnerable, self-isolate the mildly sick and open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions. This would allow the essential socializing to generate immunity among those with minimal risk of serious consequence, while saving lives, preventing overcrowding of hospitals and limiting the enormous harms compounded by continued total isolation. Let’s stop underemphasizing empirical evidence while instead doubling down on hypothetical models. Facts matter.

This would mean that schools should be open immediately at regular capacity since children are not in the high-risk category and never have been. Not only that, but they are the ones for whom the virus is the least severe and they can help us achieve herd immunity much easier and faster than older populations.

I hope this development means that we will not see Dr. Fauci or the scarf-obsessed Dr. Birx for the foreseeable future. But could we get that lucky in 2020? Somehow, I doubt it.

 

CHINA MASSES MISSILE LAUNCHERS WITHIN RANGE OF TAIWAN

BY WARREN MASS

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/36686-china-masses-missile-launchers-within-range-of-taiwan;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

International news reports have shown satellite images of amphibious armored vehicles and mobile missile launchers of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) massing at military bases in China’s Eastern Theatre Command — in China’s coastal region. These movements place Chinese missiles within range of Taiwan.

The images were originally published by the Canadian military magazine Kanwa Asian Defence. The magazine’s editor, Andrei Chang, wrote of the buildup: “The PLA ground forces want to play an active role in the Taiwan issue because so far their weapon systems are powerful enough to attack Taiwan without the help of missile force.”

“The Taiwan Strait is just 180km [111 miles] across. The PCL191 rocket launchers are able to destroy all military bases and government buildings on the island accurately because the weapons were equipped with the BeiDou navigation satellite system,” Chang added.

A reporter in the South China Morning Post for August 5 cited an unnamed analyst who said the deployment of more amphibious weapons systems in mainland China’s coastal cities across the strait from Taiwan is a sign that the armed forces are intended to play a key role in communist China’s long-standing mission to “reunify Taiwan.”

Mainland Communist China and the Republic of China on Taiwan have been estranged since 1949. During the civil war in China the communist forces of Mao Tse-tung were supplied by the Soviets, while the United States cut off military aid to China’s nationalist leader, Chiang Kai-Shek. President Truman’s special representative to China, George Marshall, boasted that he disarmed 39 anti-communist divisions “with a stroke of the pen.” After this betrayal, Chiang and approximately two million followers escaped to Formosa (now called Taiwan), where they maintained the Republic of China’s (ROC) government, and protected human rights and free enterprise. 

The mainland communists never recognized the ROC government or Taiwan’s sovereignty, insisting that the island nation is a Chinese province. Over the years, Taiwan has become increasingly isolated. The UN expelled the ROC in 1971 and admitted Communist China in its place. After the United States established diplomatic relations with the Communist Beijing government 1979, Taiwan-U.S. relations became unofficial and informal. Instead of an ambassador, the United States maintains a de facto embassy in Taipei called the American Institute in Taiwan.

When Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar met with the president of the ROC this week to discuss Taiwan’s successful response to the COVID pandemic, he became the highest ranking U.S. official to visit Taiwan in decades.

It is probably not coincidental that the Chinese chose to send jets across the mid-line of the Taiwan Strait on August 10, while Azar was visiting. The jets were tracked by land-based Taiwanese anti-aircraft missiles and were “driven out” by patrolling Taiwanese aircraft.

Building on the threat posed by the large military buildup along the coast of the mainland, the Chinese evidently decided to engage in a little saber-rattling to show their displeasure with a U.S. Cabinet member lending credibility to the ROC by his presence.

Related articles:

China Betrayed Into Communism

China Conducts Naval Exercises and Ballistic Missile Tests in South China Sea

China’s Two New Aircraft Carriers to Take Part in Intimidating War Games

China Conducts Naval Exercises and Ballistic Missile Tests in South China Sea

Tomorrow’s Superpower? China’s Naval Build-up Could Oust U.S. from Pacific

International Tribunal Rules in Favor of Philippines in Dispute With China

 

 

MAD SCIENTISTS PROPOSE FORCING COVID-19 VACCINE, PUNISHING “REFUSERS”

ABOVE: DR. LEDERMAN 

SEE: https://heavy.com/news/2020/08/dr-michael-lederman/

In a tweet on July 30, Lederman said that he blames Trump for the pandemic getting out of hand in the United States.

Dr. Michael Lederman wants to remove your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Dr. Michael Lederman believes that if you are unwilling to partake in a massive large scale medical experiment, you should be physically barred from being able to have a job, make a living, feed your children, be out in public, or exist in any meaningful way. Brought to you by his benefactors at The Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation, Gilead Pharmaceuticals, and the fourth industrial revolution.
MEHLMAN

DR. YOUNGNER

BY C. MITCHELL SHAW

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/36681-mad-scientists-propose-forcing-covid-19-vaccine-punishing-refusers;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Almost as soon as COVID-19 entered the public conversation, talk of a vaccine began to dominate the conversation. Of course, a vaccine was considered to be a thing of the future — years in the making, perhaps. Fast forward a mere few months — which were spent with the American people being worn down by lockdowns, mandatory masks, social distancing, and an economy severely damaged by government overreach — and the promise of a vaccine has become the threat of what will happen to those who refuse it. This despite the fact that no fully tested vaccine even exists, and no one knows either how effective it might be or what side effects may come along with it.

The newest push for forced COVID-19 vaccination comes in the form of USA Today op-ed piece published Thursday. Co-written by Dr. Michael Lederman, Maxwell J. Mehlman, and Dr. Stuart Youngner, the op-ed headline says that forcing vaccines is “not un-American, it’s patriotic.”

The authors are at the tip of the extremest spear where medical thinking is concerned.

Dr. Michael Lederman is a Professor of Medicine and an Infectious Disease Specialist who has publicly blamed President Trump for the pandemic. In a July 30 tweet, he wrote, “Ashamed and angry that the most robust scientific environment in the world was betrayed by an inept and fraudulent leadership and a fractured national health care infrastructure. I blame Trump for this pandemic Covid catastrophe.”

In January 2019, more than a year before the COVID-19 outbreak served as a pretext for massive government intrusion into both private lives and businesses, Lederman tweeted about how he thinks people who do not get vaccines should be dealt with. That tweet read:

Docs may chose to protect their patients by keeping antivaxers from their practices. immunization could be a prerequisite for health insurance. Unvaccinated transmitters of preventable infections could be sued by individuals and communities who acquire them.

Maxwell J. Mehlman is director of the Case Western Law Medicine Center and has deep ties to the liberal medical establishment and Big Pharma. Last year, he received a whopping $160,000 grant from the National Human Genome Research Institute at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to perform analysis on genetic testing “to explore whether alternate governance approaches are needed to ensure non-traditional genetic experiments are conducted safely and ethically.” He is also the author of several books on genetic engineering, with such titles as “Transhumanist Dreams and Dystopian Nightmares: The Promise and Peril of Genetic Engineering,” “Wondergenes: Genetic Enhancement and the Future of Society,” “The Price of Perfection: Individualism and Society in the Era of Biomedical Enhancement,” and “Access to the Genome: The Challenge to Equality.” Let those titles sink in. Mehlman writes books about altering genes to enhance human beings and create both equality and a better society. In a saner era, the phrase “mad scientist” would likely have been used to describe someone who advocated such ideas.

But Mehlman is not alone there, either. The final contributor to the “Force People to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine” piece, Dr. Stuart J. Youngner, works with Mehlman at Case Western Reserve University and shares his colleague’s dark thinking where the concept of “bio-ethics” is concerned. The author of such books as The Definition of Death: Contemporary Controversies and End-Of-Life Decisions: A Psychological Perspective, he is a defender of the barbaric practice of “Regulated Euthanasia” as it is practiced in the Netherlands. And as for mad science: Youngner conducted experiments reanimating brain tissue in dead pigs.

These are the minds that seek to instruct Americans on the ethical issues of forcing people to be injected with a vaccine that is still being developed and may have God only knows what side effects. It’s almost as if everything that has come about as part of the pandemic was designed to force a vaccine advocated by men who specialize in altering human genes.

And while they may be experts in some fields (political hatred toward President Trump; altering human genes to create a newer, better humans; killing the elderly and sick; and creating FrankenPigs), they appear way out of their depth addressing the U.S. Constitution and the proper concept of liberty.

Their pro-mystery-vaccine screed begins:

To win the war against the novel coronavirus that has killed nearly 163,000 people in this country, the only answer is compulsory vaccination — for all of us.

And while the measures that will be necessary to defeat the coronavirus will seem draconian, even anti-American to some, we believe that there is no alternative. Simply put, getting vaccinated is going to be our patriotic duty.

They then go into a logical tailspin from which they never really emerge, writing:

The reason [it will be “our patriotic duty” to get the vaccine]: When an effective vaccine is available for COVID-19, it will only defeat the pandemic if it is widely used, creating “herd immunity.” It is important to note that during an epidemic, there is no threshold above which the protection conferred by herd immunity cannot be improved. Thus, the more people who are immunized, the lower the risk for all of us, including those who are not vaccinated.

Wait. “Herd immunity” has been discussed quite a bit lately. And the pro-vax, pro-mask, pro-stay-home side has dismissed it as a myth. Now, the three Wise Men of the Apocalypse want to trot it out to make their point that immunity only comes by forcing people to get some yet-unknown injection? But they seem to realize that freedom-loving Americans are not likely to buy their spin, so they double down. That doubling down also departs from both logic and reason. Claiming that “the more people who are immunized, the lower the risk for all of us, including those who are not vaccinated” simply misses the point: If the vaccine works, those who take it are protected, while those who choose not to get vaccinated take their own risks.

Appearing to anticipate that way of thinking, the three Mad Scientists level a threat, writing a list of things “America must do when a vaccine is ready.” That list would make vaccines “free and easily accessible” and would make them compulsory with no exemptions. As for those who would refuse the vaccine on religious grounds, the answer is simple: “Do not honor religious objections.” What about those who refuse based on the principles of liberty? Nope: “Do not allow objections for personal preference, which violate the social contract.”

The unethical expounders of biomedical ethics then ask the million-dollar question: “How can government and society ensure compliance with protective vaccines?” Their answer is exactly the way they describe it in that second paragraph of their manifesto — “draconian.” They write:

Vaccine refusers could lose tax credits or be denied nonessential government benefits. Health insurers could levy higher premiums for those who by refusing immunization place themselves and others at risk, as is the case for smokers. Private businesses could refuse to employ or serve unvaccinated individuals. Schools could refuse to allow unimmunized children to attend classes. Public and commercial transit companies — airlines, trains and buses — could exclude refusers. Public and private auditoriums could require evidence of immunization for entry.

This would, of course, require a “registry of immunization” complete with “names entered after immunization is completed” and “expiration date-stamped certification cards.” What could be more un-American than forcing a novel drug on people, threatening them with losing the ability to be employed, to buy, to sell, to live unless they comply? This writer is not making a one-to-one comparison, but this smacks of the Mark of the Beast. Of course, the true one-to-one comparison is that both seem to have been born in the same mind. And this one is delivered to us by men who think government force is good, life is cheap, and playing God in the laboratory is the right thing to do.