Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Temporarily Halts Biden Vaccine Mandate

Even before OSHA had announced the suspension of Biden’s illegal vaccine mandate earlier today, I recorded the Situation Update podcast late last night (see below), predicting that the Biden vaccine mandate was doomed




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

On Nov. 8, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, covering parts of Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana,1 put a temporary stop to the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate announcing…

Because the petitions give cause to believe there are grave statutory and constitutional issues with the mandate, the mandate is hereby STAYED pending further action by this court.2

The Plaintiffs in this matter include individuals, businesses, and several states such as Louisiana, South Carolina, Texas, Mississippi, and Utah and the Defendants are the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the U.S. Department of Labor et al.

The Biden administration mandate has OSHA overseeing a requirement that all employers with a minimum of 100 employees ensure that employees are either vaccinated by Jan. 4, 2022, or tested weekly and all unvaccinated workers must wear a face mask. These requirements will affect 84 million workers.3

Plaintiffs argue that OSHA does not have the authority to implement a vaccine mandate as its authority is limited to work-place related hazards and the risk presented by COVID-19 is“a society-wide danger.”4 Plaintiffs also allege that the mandate which applies to workplaces with 100 or more employees is arbitrary as the risk COVID-19 presents in the workplace depends on the age and health of employees rather than the number of employees.

OSHA was established in 1970 to “assure safe and healthful conditions for working men and women by setting and enforcing standards and providing training, outreach, education, and compliance assistance.” Since then, OSHA regulations have reduced workplace fatalities by 63 percent.5

A senior Biden administration official said:

OSHA has broad authority to issue and enforce health and safety standards to protect workers in staying safe and healthy on the job—like precautions against bloodborne diseases, excessive noise, and falls from dangerous heights—and now, getting vaccinated against a virus that has taken more American lives than World War One, World War Two, the Vietnam War, and 9/11 combined.6

However, the threat of contacting COVID-19 is a universal threat that can affect a person in their home, school, work, at a restaurant, store, or any place there is potential contact with an infected individual. Because the threat of contracting the virus is not exclusive to the workplace, the Plaintiffs contend that OSHA should not be in charge of making sure businesses are compliant with the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate.

In their request for an Emergency Stay, Plaintiffs wrote,

In an attempt to impose a nationwide vaccination mandate without approval from Congress, the executive branch has couched its COVID-19 vaccine mandate as an emergency workplace rule affecting nearly 100 million Americans. But the ETS is neither a workplace rule nor responsive to an emergency…Vaccination status is a public health issue that affects people throughout society; it is not a hazard particular to the workplace. And there is no need to use an emergency rule to address a pandemic that has been going on for nearly two years. Congress did not grant OSHA such sweeping powers in its authorizing statute.7

The Biden administration maintains that enforcing the vaccine mandate is well within the purview of OSHA as that the OSH Act grants OSHA the right to take quick action when an emergency situation threatens workers’ safety. The White House, seemingly ignoring the U.S. Court of Appeals decisions, is advising businesses to continue with the vaccine mandate despite the U.S. Court of Appeals decision.

White House deputy press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, said:

People should not wait. They should continue to move forward and make sure they’re getting their workplace vaccinated.8

In its response to the Court of Appeals, the Biden administration argued that Plaintiffs' grievances were premature because the vaccine mandate deadline is not until January. They argued that a panel of experts concluded that the vaccine mandate was necessary to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace and that failing to enforce the mandate “would likely cost dozens or even hundreds of lives per day.”9 10

The Biden administration further contends that the vaccine mandate supersedes state and local laws which may ban vaccine mandates, testing and masks.11

At this time, it is unclear whether the U.S. Court of Appeals' decisions halt the vaccine mandate only in Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas or if it is a nationwide stoppage of the vaccine mandate.12

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms its Decision

On November 12, after reviewing the Defendant’s response, the same court unanimously affirmed its earlier decision to halt the vaccine mandate stating that it was “staggeringly overbroad” and “grossly exceeds OSHA’s statutory authority.”13

In its lengthy and thoughtful opinion, the court highlighted the fact that it is rare for OSHA to issue an emergency temporary standard (ETS) like this vaccine mandate pointed out the fact that only one of the ten ETS issued in OSHA’s 50-year history survived a court challenge.14

When considering a stay, courts look at four factors: (1) the likelihood the requesting party will ultimately succeed on the merits; (2) whether denying a stay would cause the requesting party irreparable injury; (3) whether the opposing party would be substantially injured by a stay; and (4) consideration of the public’s interest.  In this matter, the court determined that all of these factors favored a stay.15

The Vaccine Mandate is Both Over and Under inclusive

The Court implied that it is likely that it would ultimately be found that President Biden’s vaccine mandate violates the U.S. Constitution, but stated that even if it wasn’t, the mandate was “fatally flawed” by being both overinclusive as it applies to all employers with more than 99 employees regardless of the circumstances and underinclusive by not applying to employers with less than 99 employees. In effect asking the question, if the government’s intention is to save employees from the imminent grave danger posed by the COVID-19 virus, why doesn’t it apply to all places of employment regardless of size?

President Biden’s vaccine mandate is authorized to be enforced by OSHA under its emergency temporary standard (ETS) statute which allows the mandate to take effect immediately without the typical six-month public comment waiting period. Historically, courts have found that OSHA ETS’s are “an unusual response to exceptional circumstances” that should be “delicately exercised” in only certain “limited circumstances.” The Court noted that rather than being “delicately exercised,” the “Mandate is a one-size-fits-all sledgehammer.”16

The Court concluded that the vaccine mandate is “staggeringly overbroad” as it equally applies to a truck driver alone in his truck all day, a naturally immune office worker and an unvaccinated elderly employee who all have different degrees of vulnerability to the virus and therefore the mandate defies common sense.17

Because the vaccine mandate fails to cover even the most vulnerable employee who may work for an employer with less than 99 employees, the court found it to be underinclusive as well and questioned the government’s assertion that this mandate was addressing a true emergency if it didn’t apply to all workers.

The Court said:

But this kind of thinking belies the premise that any of this is truly an emergency. Indeed, under inclusiveness of this sort is often regarded as a telltale sign that the government’s interest in enacting a liberty-restraining pronouncement is in not fact “compelling”… The underinclusive nature of the Mandate implies that the Mandate’s true purpose is not to enhance workplace safety, but instead to ramp up vaccine uptake by any means necessary.18

The Court went so far as to question whether COVID-19 continues to present a grave danger in the workplace for all employees covered by the mandate considering the fact that 78 percent of all Americans over the age of 12 are vaccinated and according to the Biden administration, COVID-19 vaccines protect recipients from severe illness and death.19

The Vaccine Mandate Likely Violates the U.S. Constitution

The vaccine mandate, according to the Court, would likely be found to violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as it, “regulates noneconomic inactivity” (the decision to get a vaccine or a COVID-19 test) “that falls squarely within the State’s police power.”20 It is well-settled by the courts that mandating a vaccine or requiring testing belongs to the states under their police powers.21

The Court expressed concern over whether the vaccine mandate violates the separation of powers by attempting “to control individual conduct under the guise of workplace regulation.”22 The vaccine mandate exceeds OSHA’s authority and neither the Biden administration nor the Appellate Court has the ability to expand the agency’s authority in this manner.23

 Finally, the Court concluded that denying a stay would cause the Plaintiffs irreparable harm by denying them their constitutional rights and imposing a significant financial burden on employers while causing no harm to the Defendants.

The Cases Concerning the Biden Administration’s Vaccine Mandate Will Be Consolidated

This lawsuit opposing the Biden Administration’s mandate is one of several filed in five U.S. Court of Appeals and the D.C. Court of Appeals by at least 27 states.24 25 When the same matter is brought before multiple federal courts at the same time, the cases are consolidated and assigned to a court by way of a blind lottery system. The decision as to which jurisdiction will ultimately decide this issue could be made on or about Nov. 16, 2021.26 27

In order to increase the odds, they will get a favorable outcome in this litigation, it has been reported that several labor unions are also filing lawsuits regarding the vaccine mandate in states where the court may be more favorable to upholding the mandate. CNN stated:

Essentially, in order to have a favorable circuit court considered, hopeful parties have to buy a lottery ticket.28

 Lawyer Seam Marotta said the union lawsuits…

[A]re all about maximizing the odds of a sympathetic panel of three judges to hear the case. While the Republican led-states have filed in courts with a majority of judges appointed by a Republican president, the Unions are targeting courts with a majority—or near majority—of judges appointed by a Democratic President.

It is astonishing that the fate and freedom of approximately 84 million U.S. workers lies in the luck of the draw.

Click here to view References:

1 Library of Congress.  U.S. Federal Appellate Courts: Records and Briefs.
2 Stieber Z. Federal Court Blocks Biden Administration’s Private Business COVID-19 Vaccine MandateThe Epoch Times Nov. 7, 2021.
3 The White House. Fact Sheet: Biden Administration Announces Details of Two Major Vaccination Policies. Nov. 4, 2021.
4 Stieber Z. Federal Court Blocks Biden Administration’s Private Business COVID-19 Vaccine MandateThe Epoch Times Nov. 7, 2021.
5 U.S. Department of Labor. All About Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
6 The White House. Background Press Call on OSHA and CMS Rules for Vaccination in the Workplace. Nov. 4, 2021.
7 Stieber Z. Federal Court Blocks Biden Administration’s Private Business COVID-19 Vaccine MandateThe Epoch Times Nov. 7, 2021.
8 Kimball S. White House tells businesses to proceed with vaccine mandate despite court-ordered pause. CNBC Nov. 8, 2021.
9 Ibid.
10 Williams P. Biden administration urges appeals court not to block new vaccine rules for companiesNBC News Nov. 8, 2021.
11 Kimball S. White House tells businesses to proceed with vaccine mandate despite court-ordered pause. CNBC Nov. 8, 2021.
12 Mulvihill G. Biden Team Defends Worker Vaccine Rule, Wants Cases CombinedU.S. News & World Report Nov.8, 2021.
13 Fritze J. Federal appeals court keeps on hold Bidens COVID19 vaccine or testing rule for large companies. USA Today Nov. 12, 2021.
14 BST Holdings et al. v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration et al. Case 21-60845 Document 00516091902 Nov. 12, 2021.
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 NPR. Appeals court temporarily halts Biden vaccine mandate for larger businesses. Nov. 6, 2021.
25 Kimball S. White House tells businesses to proceed with vaccine mandate despite court-ordered pause. CNBC Nov. 8, 2021.
26 Ibid.
27 Wliiams P. Biden administration urges appeals court not to block new vaccine rules for companiesNBC News Nov. 8, 2021.
29 de Vogue A. Liberals are buying their tickets in hopes of winning the vaccine mandate lawsuit lottery. CNN. Nov. 12, 2021.




ALEX NEWMAN: “Build Back Better” Bill Will BURY America

The Build Back Better abomination being pushed through Congress by the Democrats will completely restructure the U.S. economy and our way of life, institutionalizing racism and climate decrees while bankrupting American taxpayers and businesses, warns The New American magazine's Alex Newman in this episode of Behind The Deep State. This is actually part of a globalist program that was launched by the United Nations and is being peddled by the World Economic Forum alongside the "Great Reset." Newman points out that the actual cost of this bill, originally set at $3.5 trillion, will probably be at least 2.5 trillion, despite a "compromise" version supposedly "only" costing $1.85 trillion. It will be a major boon for Communist China while undermining the U.S. economy.

See the Action Alert from the John Birch Society: 🇺🇸

The New American:

Vaccine Passports are Akin to Institutionalized Segregation

BY Peter Doshi, PhD and Aditi Bhargava, PhD


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

Opinion | Increasingly, vaccination is no longer a matter of choice. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of workplaces and schools are instituting COVID-19 vaccine mandates, with more expected following formal FDA licensure of the vaccines. But mandating people and their children who have consciously chosen not to get vaccinated—a group that tends to be younger, less educated, Republican, non-white and uninsured—is a recipe for creating new and deeper fractures within our society, the kind of fractures we may profoundly regret in hindsight.

Let’s not sugarcoat it: This is a new form of institutionalized segregation. Yes, some unvaccinated adults may swallow this bitter pill and comply as a way of doing their part in making America safer. But many will see it—along with requirements that the unvaccinated wear masks or undergo regular COVID testing—as a thinly veiled attempt at public shaming. After all, if the goal is to maximize the interruption of spread, then surely all people should be masked irrespective of vaccination status.

Forced compliance will come with future consequences. The ensuing anger, resentment, and loss of trust form a ticking time bomb waiting to go off. Are we ready to add this mandate to the list of issues helping erode the fabric of our society?

These practices diverge substantially from the historical norm of equal opportunity. For all other required vaccines, religious and philosophical exemptions allow unvaccinated children to enjoy the same educational experience as the vaccinated. This is because exemptions reflect a social value that in the United States, there are valid reasons for refusing treatments or vaccines, and these reasons will be respected. Once exempt, there are no sanctions experienced in everyday life. But with COVID vaccine mandates, even those with exemptions are being sanctioned, sending another clear message: We really don’t care about your reasons.

And in schools, where a child’s experience will be shaped by their parents’ decisions and those of policymakers, the situation could become tragic. If schools invite vaccinated children to lose their masks, what was once an act of social responsibility could morph into a mark of disease.

What should we anticipate? Children of different ages being barred from mingling. Children being bullied, ridiculed, and mocked, with taunts using terms like “covidiot.” Differential treatment toward unvaccinated children by some teachers (who are, just like everyone else, individuals with their own views about COVID vaccines). And families deciding to withdraw from formal education, choosing instead to home-school.

Vaccinate-or-mask policies will drive a wedge between children and parents, cause daily psychological harm, carrying long-lasting consequences for future generations.

Some might see mandate resistance as a symptom of vaccine misinformation. But considering most of these individuals have complied with mandates for routine vaccines such as mumps and measles, diseases of far less societal consequence than COVID, is it not worth listening to their objections against COVID vaccine mandates?

For some, there’s little value in a vaccine against a disease they have already recovered from, even as new variants develop. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that by May, 120 million Americans of all ages (35 percent of the population) had already been infected with SARS-CoV-2. New data shows natural immunity is six to 13 times more protective against emerging variants than vaccines.

For many, it is a product safety issue. The vaccines were developed and tested in months, not years, before rollout, and they were initially authorized by regulators in the context of an emergency. These people want greater assurances of safety and efficacy—something that requires additional time and data.

Yet in response, some public commentators are calling for the FDA to speed its review process and approve all of the coronavirus vaccines. Thus far, only one COVID-19 vaccine has received full approval. While such approval might convince a slice of the unvaccinated, many will remain skeptical. Considering that the pivotal safety and efficacy trials were designed as two-year trials to finish in mid-2022, an approval this year can be seen as premature.

Despite hundreds of millions of doses already in bodies, we are still in the learning phase regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, as can be witnessed in the data about “breakthrough infections” and previously unknown side effects like myocarditis and blood clots.

Most people may accept this uncertainty and conclude that whatever the risks, they are outweighed by the benefits. But for the minority who desire greater scientific certainty, we should respect these reasons, not respond with mandates.

We already know this country has deep divisions. We simply cannot allow coercive policies that will result in the creation of a society that is less just and more fractured than it already is.

This article was reprinted with permission. It was originally published by the Brownstone Institute. Peter Doshi is an associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy and senior editor at The BMJ. Aditi Bhargava is a professor in the Department of ObGyn and Reproductive Sciences at the University of California San Francisco.

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Note: This commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers.  The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation, and policymaking.

Federal Employees Fight COVID Vaccine Mandates in Court



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

With a looming deadline of Nov. 22, 2021, thousands of federal employees and contractors continue to push back against the Biden administration’s sweeping COVID vaccine mandates. According to The Washington Post, tens of thousands of federal employees remain unvaccinated pending word on whether religious or medical exemptions will be approved.

Federal employees who fail to comply by Nov. 22, including those who are teleworking, “are in violation of a lawful order” and are “subject to discipline, up to and including termination or removal.”1

Grassroots Organizations Lead Charge in Pursuing Legal Action Against Federal COVID Vaccine Mandate

Two large grassroots organizations headed by and comprised of federal employees are leading the charge in legal efforts challenging the federal government’s action to mandate COVID vaccine in the workplace. The organization Federal Employees for Freedom (FEFF) is preparing to pursue litigation against the federal government on behalf of thousands of federal employees by filing a lawsuit through the Health Freedom Defense Fund and Davillier Law Group.

FEFF has several online platforms, including a website and social media groups, which augments communication among employees and provides updates on ongoing lawsuits.

The second organization, Feds for Medical Freedom (F4MF), filed the first lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The legal complaint was filed on Oct. 19 on behalf of federal employees from several agencies including the Department of Defense, Department of Commerce, Department of Justice, and Department of Homeland Security.2

The Department of Homeland Security has more than 20 employees listed in the lawsuit, more than any other federal organization. Feds for Medical Freedom requested the court block Biden’s mandatory COVID vaccination policy from going into effect.3

The lawsuit, which has more than 50 plaintiffs, cites ethical concerns surrounding the mandate, such as the government unlawfully inquiring about an employee’s medical history.2

Plaintiffs also cite studies reporting that both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals can spread COVID-19. As many lawyers, medical professionals, and politicians have done, the complaint questions the lack of consideration for those who have natural immunity to the virus, which has been shown to be just as effective if not more effective than vaccine acquired immunity.4

Federal Employees Seek Religious Exemptions to COVID Vaccine Mandates

Thousands of federal employees are seeking religious exemptions and a smaller number are seeking medical exemptions to the government’s COVID vaccine mandate. Despite the upcoming Nov. 22 deadline, employees cannot be summarily fired if they are pending exemption approval or denial. If an exemption is granted, unvaccinated employees must wear a mask, follow social distancing protocols, and be tested regularly.1

Questions remain for both the private and public sectors surrounding the legality of denying a religious exemption under the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Act states that employers must provide “reasonable accommodation” for those objecting to a job requirement based upon their faith. A religious belief is defined as a “sincerely held” belief.1

Veterans Administration to Dismiss Unvaccinated Employees who Pose a Risk

Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough stated that while the agency will not “question the legitimacy of an employee’s religious exemption,” the agency can and will dismiss unvaccinated employees who pose a risk to the health of veterans.1

As of Oct. 20, no religious exemptions had been granted for military members despite Pentagon press secretary John Kirby stating earlier this year:

We take freedom of religion and worship seriously, in the military, it’s one of the things that we sign up to defend, and so it’s something that’s done very carefully.5

Class Action Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of All Military Branches Disputing COVID Vaccine Mandates

On Oct. 15, a class action lawsuit6 disputing the federal COVID vaccine mandate was filed. At the same time, a request for a temporary restraining order and injunction7 against President Biden, Department of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was filed on behalf of members from all five branches of the military, as well as federal employees and contractors. The lawsuit states:

Our citizens in uniform may not be stripped of basic rights simply because they doffed their civilian clothes.6

Court Rules Temporary Hold on Mandate for Private Businesses

A federal appeals panel placed a temporary hold on Biden’s Executive Order, which requires businesses with over 100 employees to implement a COVID vaccine mandate. However, this temporary hold applies only to the private sector. The New York Times reports that the court ruling is a sign that the Biden administration may be facing an uphill battle.8 A separate lawsuit was also filed in the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis by 11 states including Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Utah.

Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas tweeted:

The fight is not over and I will never stop resisting this Admin’s unconstitutional overreach!8

The White House urged businesses to proceed with the mandate despite the court order.9 In October, the Biden administration rejected a district court order that would halt the discipline of military employees who pursue legal action over denied religious exemptions.

Attorney Michael Yoder stated:

The Biden administration has shown an unprecedented cavalier attitude toward the rule of law and an utter ineptitude at basic constitutional contours.10

If you would like to receive an e-mail notification of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Rein L, Duncan I, Horton A. Nearing Monday coronavirus vaccine deadline, thousands of federal workers seek religious exemptions to avoid shotsThe Washington Post Nov. 7, 2021.
2 Dan Altschuld et al., v. Gina Raimondo et al. United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Complaint. Filed Oct. 19, 2021.
3 Giaratelli A. New coalition of federal employees dues Biden over vaccine mandate. Washington Examiner Oct. 25, 2021.
4 Hobley N. Senators, doctors urge CDC to recognize natural immunity. The Vaccine Reaction Oct. 25, 2021.
5 Hobley N. U.S. Marines not fully vaccinated by Nov. 28, 2021 will be dismissed. The Vaccine Reaction Nov. 1, 2021.
6 Navy Seal 1 et al. v. Joseph R. Biden et al. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida. Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction with memorandum of law in support. Filed Oct. 15, 2021.
7 Navy Seal 1 et al. v. Joseph R. Biden et al. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida. Verified class action complain for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and declaratory relief. Filed Oct. 15, 2021.
8 Hirsch L, Paz I. A court temporarily blocks Biden’s vaccine mandate. The New York Times Nov. 6, 2021.
9 Kimball S. White house tells businesses to proceed with vaccine mandate despite court-ordered pause. CNBC Nov. 8, 2021.
10 Gentile L. Biden administration rejects court order to stop terminating employees seeking vaccine exemptions. Washington Examiner Oct. 29, 2021.

THE KILLING FIELDS: Dozens of athletes now confirmed to have dropped dead from covid “vaccines”



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

(Natural News) Professional athletes all around the world are dropping dead from Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines,” and the mainstream media is doing everything in its power to hide this fact from the public.

When it does get reported, the talking-heads call it a “mystery,” but it is no mystery. In every case, an athlete develops heart problems immediately after getting jabbed that eventually leads to sudden death.

Prior to the unveiling of “Operation Warp Speed,” it was unheard of for the average person to develop myocarditis, for instance. Now it is a common occurrence, even in young children.

Mark Playne from “Not on the Been” is keeping a running list of professional sports players who develop sudden health issues, including death, almost immediately after getting injected for the Fauci Flu. The following are some of the cases he has documented thus far:

  • Lexi Riggles, a college basketball player who “died unexpectedly” back in October
  • Tom Greenway, a champion jockey who died in early November
  • Nelson Solano, a Spanish footballer who died of a heart attack in early November
  • Shawn Rhoden, a bodybuilder and former Mr. Olympia who died of an apparent heart attack in early November
  • Layla da Costa, a Miss World contestant from Italy who was found dead at her house after failing to show up for work
  • George “Da Bull” Peterson III, who was found dead in a Florida hotel room just two days before he was scheduled to compete in the Mr. Olympia contest
  • Jordan Tucker, a footballer who passed away unexpectedly during play
  • Avi Barot, a Saurashtra batter who died after suffering cardiac arrest

There are also many other instances of players falling to the ground during the play and having to be hospitalized. The following are said to still be alive, despite their serious injuries:

  • Emil Palsson, an Icelandic midfielder who collapsed during a football game after suffering cardiac arrest
  • Luther Singh, a South African winger who had to be hospitalized after collapsing on the field
  • Kyle Warner, a mountain bike racer who developed pericarditis, POTS, and reactive arthritis following his second Pfizer injection. Warner’s doctor refused to admit the jab may have been the cause of all this, and instead blamed a “psychotic episode.”

This is just a small sampling of the many cases out there of young, healthy people who after getting injected either became seriously ill or died. As you will notice, most of the injuries and deaths are heart-related, which is what you would expect to occur in someone who is elderly or who has a preexisting health condition.

None of the aforementioned people fit that demographic. In fact, all of them were in tip-top shape, seeing as how they are professional athletes who train regularly, eat healthily and keep themselves as fit as possible.

The only thing that changed in their lives is that they took the injections as demanded of them. And now they are either suffering from major illnesses or had to be buried because they passed away.

“The only ones who have 100 percent immunity after the vaccine is given are the vaccine makers,” noted one commenter at Natural News.

“The vaccine is neither safe nor effective unless you consider that Big Pharma is safe from lawsuits and effective at destroying your immune system! Safe and effective from catching and spreading covid, not so much!”

Another suggested that many children in the younger 5-11 demographic will also be dying in the coming months and that eventually, Jesus will “take vengeance for their deaths.”

More of the latest news about injuries and deaths caused by Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” can be found at

Sources for this article include:

Bill Gates says governments must PUNISH people for questioning mask and vaccine mandates online

Image: Bill Gates says governments must PUNISH people for questioning mask and vaccine mandates online



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

(Natural News) In a recent interview with British politician Jeremy Hunt, Bill Gates said that governments around the world must begin to PUNISH people for questioning mask and vaccine mandates online. It’s not enough that social media companies have gone the way of the Chinese Communist Party, targeting information that exposes crimes against humanity and blacklisting critical information that would help people make an informed decision. Now, Bill Gates wants not only to silence those who disagree with him, but he also wants to turn governments against their own people when those people dare speak out of line against Bill Gate’s global agendas, surveillance systems, economic controls, genetic engineering, and medical mandates.

Bill Gates seeks to indemnify himself from public scrutiny, accountability, the rule of law

Bill Gates has insistently funded and promoted vaccine passports systems around the world. He aggressively promotes authoritarian lockdowns, and he defends medical mandates that violate the sanctity of the individual. Gates expresses his desire to inject every man, woman, and child routinely while restricting the civil liberties of those who do not comply.

As the greatest financial contributor to the World Health Organization (WHO), Bill Gates is the single most influential figure over public health initiatives. These Bill Gates “public health” initiatives do not adhere to medical ethics, and they violate the informed consent principle, locking people down, restricting movement, and coercing compliance to deadly medical experiments (namely covid vaccines).

The WHO is the entity propagating an endless “pandemic,” giving governments indefinite emergency power to seize human rights, restrict human movement, and experiment on people’s minds, behavior, and physiology. At the behest of Bill Gates and his “philanthropic” GAVI Vaccine Alliance, the WHO is now promoting the implementation of a permanent medical police state, digital vaccine passports, and an economic Ponzi scheme that enshrines the global elite as untouchable, immunizing the elite from public criticism, accountability and ultimately, the rule of law.

Bill Gates is feeling the heat of global dissent

The world is in an uproar over the likes of Bill Gates, and a growing number of people are in the process of setting their selves free from the top-down system of financial and political control that has allowed people like Bill Gates to play God and experiment on human lives with no remorse.

Feeling the heat of global dissent, Bill Gates is now calling on governments to PUNISH people who oppose mask and vaccine mandates online. This was recorded in a 30-minute interview with British politician Jeremy Hunt. In the interview, Gates discussed his desire to control governments and financial systems worldwide through the auspices of fighting climate change and preparing for the “next pandemic.” Admitting that the current vaccines do not stop “transmission,” he said, “we need a new way of doing the vaccines” which includes “patches” applied in the skin.

Concerned about “mask hesitancy” and “vaccine hesitancy,” Gates called on governments to “step up” and suppress “false information” about masks and covid shots. He said Facebook censorship doesn’t go far enough, that government should get involved in regulating what is allowed to be shared online. Gates suggested that “eventually governments will decide [on supposed] wild conspiracy theories: do they have to be double-checked? Do they have to slow down their spread? Do you have to put a counterbalancing point of view there?”

Gates wants politicians to plan for “future pandemics” by installing medical surveillance programs and “germ games” that simulate the most effective ways to control people and monitor their DNA and control their genetic expression. He wants a task force greater than the one he established at the WHO — a task force that requires “tens of billions” of dollars in investment from all nations around the world. “So, you’d think this would be a priority,” he smirked, predicting that “next year will be where those [financial] allocations have to get made, including this global pandemic task force.”

This limp-wristed psychopath is not finished yet; the more people resist the more pressure he applies.

Sources include:

Pressure Building on Arizona School Board President to Resign

Pressure Building on Arizona School Board President to Resign



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

Not only have Scottsdale police opened an investigation into Scottsdale Unified School District’s president, Jann-Michael Greenburg, over his “dossier” of parents opposed to the school district’s policies on masking and Critical Race Theory, but more than 1,200 parents have signed a petition demanding his resignation as well.

His resignation is expected shortly.

Since The New American first reported on the incident on Friday, additional damning evidence has surfaced. Aside from the police statement — “[We’re] aware of the allegations against Scottsdale Unified School District President Jann-Michael Greenburg. We are conducting an investigation into the matter and will report our findings once it is complete” — a petition to oust Greenburg is gathering considerable momentum.

From the petition:

On November 9, 2021, The Scottsdale Independent published an article “The Greenburg Files: Is there a file on you?” demonstrating the expansive and disturbing surveillance activities of Scottsdale Unified School District Governing Board President Jann-Michael Greenburg….

The “Greenburg Files” contain many disturbing documents, audio files, and video recordings of several individuals, including photos of SUSD students.

There is no legitimate purpose for any of these background checks, deeds, marital records, financial documents, professional certifications and more to be curated, stored, and shared in such a manner by Mr. Greenburg.

The files also contain unredacted SUSD emails and screenshots of open district email tabs — bringing even more concern that SUSD resources may have been shared or used outside of their intended or legally allowed purposes.

The Google drive contains 160 pages of information on parents unhappy with the school board’s policies related to COVID-19. The information appears to have been gleaned following extensive investigation by its author, which explains the surprising amount of detail the drive reveals.

It was not only surprising but unsettling as well. Targets included parents who were mounting an effort to recall Greenburg. Greenburg is single and lives with his father, Mark, who, it appears, spent the time and the money to build the “Greenburg Files.”

It remains unclear what purpose the Greenburgs had in gathering the information, but parents aren’t waiting: They want the president out, now.

Amy Carney, a mother of six and a candidate for the district’s governing board, told Fox News: “I’d call this retaliation … the list of parents targeted in the drive appears to be anyone who has spoken out about anything against our district publicly or online.”

The petition concludes:

His [Jann-Michael’s] actions have made it unequivocally clear that he is unfit for public office.… We stand together in requesting the immediate termination of Jann-Michael Greenburg as SUSD Governing Board President, and we further demand his resignation as an SUSD Governing Board Member.

SUSD is one of the largest suburban school districts in metro Phoenix, serving most of Scottsdale as well as parts of Phoenix, Paradise Valley, and Tempe. That explains why the national media is now following the case.

Even after he resigns, Greenburg, and his father Mark, are likely to face legal consequences. The New American noted that attorney Alexander Kolodin had grave concerns that the Google drive — the “Greenburg Files” — violated Arizona’s Parents’ Bill of Rights that recognizes a parent’s right to consent before the government makes a video or voice recording of the minor child.

But Mark Greenburg is a private citizen who did the recordings, and so sanctions might come from another source. As Kolodin explained:

Both Arizona and the federal government have laws prohibiting both intimidation generally and voter intimidation in particular….

If these allegations are true, Mr. Greenburg and his father might be liable to violating one or more of these laws.

In any event, Jann-Michael Greenburg’s tenure as president of SUSD is about to come to an end, but the legal consequences over his involvement with the “Greenburg Files” will continue to plague him into the future.

Related article:

School Board President Under Pressure to Resign Over His “Opposition Dossier” on Parents Protesting CRT