I’m leaving in a little while to attend a birthday dinner for a friend who just turned 70. It’s a right good ways from here, so I’ll stay overnight and return to Schloss Bodissey sometime tomorrow.
There will be no news feed tonight, but I shouldn’t have any problem putting one together for tomorrow night.
Auf wiedersehen!
The communist who heads the World Health Organization has now acknowledged that people who have been injected with the experimental mRNA treatment that is intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus are not prevented from transmitting the disease to others. One might expect that the lesson to be learned is that the current Coronamadness (including the vax program) should be abandoned, but the WHO wants us to crank up the fear machine and do 2020 all over again.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Report24:
WHO also states: Vaccinated persons transmit virus, vaccinations do not end any measures
WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made it clear at a press conference on Wednesday that the effect of the vaccination was being overestimated and that those who had been vaccinated would feel like they were in a false sense of security.
He explained that, according to the “data”, the transmission of Covid-19 through the vaccines has only been reduced by only 40% since the delta variant appeared. Where the data come from that the transmission is significantly reduced by the vaccination remains open: New data show that vaccinated and unvaccinated people are infectious to the same extent (and for the same length of time), and the narrative of the less “dangerous” vaccinated people accordingly collapses more and more. Either way, the WHO chief calls on people to continue to adhere to the protective measures imposed, regardless of their vaccination status.
He noted:
We are concerned about the false sense of security that the vaccines have ended the pandemic and that vaccinated people do not need to take any further precautions.
He is giving a clear rejection to militant vaccination advocates who believe that the compulsory vaccination of the entire population would magically eradicate Covid-19 and prevent further lockdowns.
The discrimination against the unvaccinated is therefore virtually devoid of any basis. The same was recently stated in an article published on November 20 in the renowned science magazine The Lancet entitled “Covid-19: Stigmatizing the unvaccinated is not justified” (Original: “Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified”).
At the same time, the claim that vaccination protects against severe disease can be questioned: There are no reliable data for this, as doctors repeatedly criticize (see, for example, this article or this article).
The Biden Administration has withdrawn its requirement that all federal employees must be vaccinated against COVID-19. Meanwhile, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against the administration’s mandate that all employees in medical facilities that receive Medicaid or Medicare funding must be vaccinated.
In other news, Darrell Brooks Jr., the Butcher of Waukesha, has been charged with a sixth count of intentional homicide after the death of an 8-year-old boy who was wounded in the attack.
To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.
Thanks to Dean, DV, MM, Reader from Chicago, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.
Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.
Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. I check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.
TL Davis has updated his important documentary “Lies of Omission” for 2021. The full movie may be watched on Rumble; see the links below.
Lies of Omission 2021
by TL Davis
Due to a technical problem with the file stored with the distributor we had to do an update on Lies of Omission. In review, there was so much good information still relevant on the film, especially in the wake of the 2020 election and the pandemic (plandemic/scamdemic), that we decided if we were going to go through the headache, why not update the film?
A “director’s cut” so to speak. We called it Lies of Omission 2021 and added, never-before-seen footage from the original interviews. At the same time, we went to a studio and enlisted the help of their staff to increase the production quality.
All in all, though a bit shorter, Lies of Omission 2021 is a better film with a cleaner storyline and smoother, better graphics. It tells a slightly different story from the original, too. What was relevant in 2017, is no longer, and what was not readily apparent, like tyranny and communism, is.
This issues are now openly recognized by a greater share of the world’s population. Governments worldwide have made Lies of Omission 2021 more relevant and with a much wider market than it ever would have had independently. It wasn’t until the governments demonstrated every aspect of communism and tyranny that it came into its own.
Just before the last quarterly report, Lies of Omission had been seen in 12 countries on 5 different channels. An increase in countries and channels from before. We think, with your help, it can finally be used for the red pill film it was intended to be.
It’s free on Rumble, but let the ads run to help us recoup a little bit of what is still in the red on this project. If you watch this version and agree that it’s much more polished than the original and equally as valuable, push it out to friends and family, share it on social media everywhere. Link it on your sites and help us get the word out.
The more views it gets and the longer the ads run, the better it is for us, but really, this is the sort of film right now that can truly make a difference. Of course, people still have to stand up for their rights, but we feel this offers enough of a consolidation of thought that it edges them ever closer to that position.
Hat tip: WRSA.
A boat full of puir wee African bairns has finally been unloaded at a Sicilian port, thanks to the timely arrival of a storm at sea, which raised the tear-jerk quotient high enough to force the Italian authorities to allow the landing.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from PolitikStube:
New “specialists” arrived: Sea-Watch 4 unloads 461 in the Sicilian port
The migrant ferry Sea-Watch 4 had been waiting for a “safe harbor” to be assigned since Monday; Italy and Malta refused several times. Then a storm came up, the ship got caught in a storm off the coast of Sicily and the crew declared a state of emergency. Now finally Italy took pity and gave permission to enter the port of Augusta, where the shuttle ship arrived yesterday his 461 guests on board, mostly young men. 14 guests were evacuated in advance, sick and pregnant women.
SOT, Alberto Mallardo, Sea-Watch spokesman (Italian): “Of the people on board, 149 are unaccompanied minors, 9 are pregnant women and several small children. You all have to disembark now and find a place in our country.”
They are not the only “safe havens” in Europe, especially when those willing to travel are picked up on the Libyan coast. The collected could have been allowed to go ashore in Tripoli, for example, instead of holding them on board for eight days and playing a number of misery and suffering in order to extortionately force entry.
Sea-Watch announced on November 23, 2021 on Twitter: According to international law, we have to bring people rescued from distress at sea to a safe place that can only be in Europe. The authorities must finally allow the landing!
You put your own international law together, the word “next” is simply left out and only “Europe” is added.
Afterword from the translator:
Libya faces along to the Mediterranean and had been effectively the cork in the bottle of Africa. So all problems, economic problems and civil war in Africa — previously people fleeing those problems didn’t end up in Europe because Libya policed the Mediterranean. That was said explicitly at the time, back in early 2011 by Muammar Gaddafi: ‘What do these Europeans think they’re doing, trying to bomb and destroy the Libyan State? There’s going to be floods of migrants out of Africa and jihadists into Europe, and this is exactly what happened. — Julian Assange
Below are two videos from Germany which feature very different opinions about the experimental mRNA treatment that is intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus.
Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling.
The first video features a young lady named Sarah Frühauf who offers her opinions on the television program Tagesschau for the state broadcaster ARD. Ms. Frühauf is quite strident and angry in her remarks about unvaxed people, who need to be punished for their insolence and selfishness in not allowing themselves to be jabbed by being forcibly “vaccinated”:
Nicolaus Fest is a member of the European Parliament for the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany). The second video shows excerpts from a brief speech given by Mr. Fest on the floor of the EP. His remarks concerning the “vaccine” are diametrically opposed to those of Sarah Frühauf:
Video transcript #1:
Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this post from the Portuguese blog Inconveniente:
Is Islam a threat?
by Jose do Carmo
A few days ago, someone said to me that in his opinion, Islam is a religion like others, and he casually rejected the idea that it was a threat to the rich, strong, and civilized West.
Are there really no reasons to fear?
Well, beyond the very clear and explicit exhortations to violence and conquest, which can be read in the sacred texts of Islam, it is always history that shows us that since this religion emerged about 1,400 years ago, Muslims have consistently followed the Koranic command to make war on the infidels, on the House of War.
As a result, almost 75% of what was then called “Christendom” was definitively conquered by the House of Islam, including all of North Africa, Anatolia, Syria, etc.
Many European territories were under Muslim occupation, at times for centuries, from Portugal to Russia, passing through Spain, France, Italy, Ukraine, Lithuania, Serbia, Romania, etc. etc, only being liberated by force of arms.
More than 15 million Europeans were captured and enslaved in the name of jihad, in a process that lasted until the 19th century, reaching faraway Iceland. In fact, one of the first external wars waged by the USA (Jefferson and Adams) was precisely against the Muslim slavers, with Portugal as an ally.
All in all, for more than 1,000 years, Islam has been the principal and permanent threat to Western Civilization and has always been on the offensive when the relative potential of combat has been in its favor.
In the 20th century, Europe modernized itself and managed to neutralize jihad, but now seems to have forgotten everything about this old and constant threat.
For many Westerners, Islam is just a religion like others, and some, without knowing anything of history and the texts, even proclaim that it is “a religion of peace”.
No, it is not.
What history tells us is that it is the most formidable and persistent enemy that our civilization has faced up to today, and this has not changed just because circumstantially, we believe that we are on top.
The major problem, still, is not the forgetting of history, but its rewriting, so that it fits into new, politically correct narratives.
And this woke narrative, conveyed in the schools, in the media, and in the cinema, is that Muslims are part of the extensive group of historical victims of the West, that is, of the “heteropatriarchal whites” or by definition, the “oppressor”.
For example, the Crusades, effectively a military reaction to the Islamic conquest of the so-called Christian holy places, is described as a cruel and unjust attack on the poor Muslims, who were peacefully in their lands drinking tea and smoking water pipes. Moreover, the Muslim invasions are not even described as such, rather as innocuous “advances” by Arabs, Moors, Almoravids, Tatars, Mamluks, Ottomans, etc., deliberately hiding their true rational aggregate, jihad against the infidel.
But that is history, the appeasers will say. That time has passed. We have to look to the future and enter into a new era of mutual respect and tolerance, even if to do this, we have to gild history a bit.
The original version of following essay by the late Mike Vanderboegh was written before the turn of the millennium. Ten years later, when he wrote this revised version (posted at the old WRSA site), he noted that it had stood the test of time. Another thirteen years have passed since then, and as Spicy Time draws closer the relevance of his words is even greater.
At the suggestion of WRSA, I am reposting the entire essay here. To see the rest of the illustrations and the embedded video, visit the WRSA post.
A Handgun Against an Army — Ten Years After
by Mike Vanderboegh
July 29, 2008
Almost a decade ago now, I penned “A Letter From Hagood’s Crossroads, Alabama,” subtitled “What Good Can a Handgun Do Against an Army?”
Over the years it has proven to be the single most popular piece I have ever written. To this day, I get emails and snail mails from folks who have stumbled across it for the first time, thanking me for writing it. It is a humbling experience for a scribbler such as myself to realize that he has struck a chord in his audience — humbling and gratifying.
Still, I have always meant to rework “Handgun” to correct some of the minor errors and irritating flaws that always occur whenever you whip out a topical opinion piece, as I did this one. For example, one of the things that always bothered me was that I was forced to paraphrase Hopper explaining the facts of life to his marauding gang of ATF/biker/bandido grasshoppers in “A Bug’s Life.” In the re-issue below, I correct that. Indeed, thanks to technological advances in the intervening years, I am now able to give you the YouTube link so you can HEAR Hopper’s presentation of the dialectic of tyranny yourself with just a click of the mouse.
Incredible.
Another area requiring work was the wolf-sheep metaphor, which if I had just hewed to the wisdom of my grandpa imparted to me years ago would have more properly been (as I have corrected it below) a wolf-sheep-sheepdog metaphor. Don’t ask me why I did it that way the first time. I wrote it, as most of my pieces back then and since, at one sitting in the wee hours of the morning.
And equally importantly, without the steadying hand of a good editor. (Here, I tip my hat to my friend David Codrea.)
In truth, for something that has been so well received for so long, at the time I gave it no more thought or care than any of the other many things I wrote during the Era of the Clintonista-Militia Cold War. Yet it is “Handgun” that has, apparently, stood the test of time. I will explore why I think this is in the afterword to this reissue.
For now, let me present again, with slight updated revision, “What Good Can A Handgun Do Against an Army?,” with many thanks to my friends — Peter at Western Rifle Shooters Association and Chris at Mindful Musings — for the firm nudge prompting me to do so. — MBV
“What Good Can A Handgun Do Against an Army?”
A friend of mine forwarded me a question a friend of his had posed:
“If/when our Federal Government comes to pilfer, pillage, plunder our property and destroy our lives, what good can a handgun do against an army with advanced weaponry, tanks, missiles, planes, or whatever else they might have at their disposal to achieve their nefarious goals? (I’m not being facetious: I accept the possibility that what happened in Germany, or similar, could happen here; I’m just not sure that the potential good from an armed citizenry in such a situation outweighs the day-to-day problems caused by masses of idiots who own guns.)”
If I may, I’d like to try to answer that question. I certainly do not think the writer facetious for asking it. The subject is a serious one to which I have given much research and considerable thought. I believe that upon the answer to this question depends the future of our Constitutional republic, our liberty and perhaps our lives.
My friend Aaron Zelman, one of the founders of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, told me once:
“If every Jewish and anti-nazi family in Germany had owned a Mauser rifle and twenty rounds of ammunition AND THE WILL TO USE IT (emphasis supplied — MBV), Adolf Hitler would be a little-known footnote to the history of the Weimar Republic.”
Note well that phrase: “and the will to use it,” for the simply-stated question, “What good can a handgun do against an army?” is in fact a complex one and must be answered at length and carefully.
It is a military question.
It is also a political question.
But above all it is a moral question which strikes to the heart of what makes men free, and what makes them slaves.
First, let’s answer the military question.
Most military questions have both a strategic and a tactical component. Let’s first consider the tactical.
A friend of mine owns an instructive piece of history. It is a small, crude pistol [see the image at the top of this post], made out of sheet-metal stampings by the U.S. during World War II. While it fits in the palm of your hand and is a slowly-operated, single-shot arm, its powerful .45 caliber projectile will kill a man with brutal efficiency. With a short, smooth-bore barrel it can reliably kill only at point blank ranges, so its use requires the will (brave or foolhardy) to get in close before firing. It is less a soldier’s weapon than an assassin’s tool. The U.S. manufactured them by the millions during the war, not for our own forces but rather to be air-dropped behind German lines to resistance units in occupied Europe and Asia. They cost exactly two dollars and ten cents to make.
Crude and slow (the fired case had to be knocked out of the breech by means of a little wooden dowel, a fresh round procured from the storage area in the grip and then manually reloaded and cocked. It was so wildly inaccurate it couldn’t hit the broad side of a French barn at 50 meters, but to the Resistance man or woman who had no firearm it still looked pretty darn good.
The theory and practice of it was this: First, you approach a German sentry with your little pistol hidden in your coat pocket and, with Academy-award sincerity, ask him for a light for your cigarette (or the time the train leaves for Paris, or if he wants to buy some non-army-issue food or a half-hour with your “sister”). When he smiles and casts a nervous glance down the street to see where his Sergeant is, you blow his brains out with your first and only shot, then take his rifle and ammunition. Your next few minutes are occupied with “getting out of Dodge,” for such critters generally go around in packs. After that (assuming you evade your late benefactor’s friends) you keep the rifle and hand your little pistol to a fellow Resistance fighter so he can go get his own rifle.
Or, maybe, you then use your rifle to get a submachine gun from the Sergeant when he comes running. Perhaps you get very lucky and pick up a light machine gun, two boxes of ammunition and a haversack of hand grenades. With two of the grenades and the expenditure of a half-a-box of ammunition at a hasty roadblock the next night, you and your friends get a truck full of arms and ammunition. (Some of the cargo is sticky with “Boche” blood, but you don’t mind, not terribly.)
Boris Reitschuster is a popular German vlogger and journalist. The following article from his website discusses the tendentious efforts by a well-known and supposedly independent fact-checking organization.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for the translation:
Correctiv shoots themselves in the leg during fact check
Truth-guards co-financed by the taxpayer embarrass themselves
These days, if you report critically, you will rapidly have the fact-checker on your back. In recent years the self-appointed truth keepers have sprung up like mushrooms around the world, often with opaque financing models.
The best-known “fact-checkers” in Germany are the “fact fox” of the Bavarian broadcasting company, the “fact finder” of the Tagesschau, the agitation portal Volksverpetzer, and the self-proclaimed research network Correctiv.
Correctiv refutes the quote on the basis of a wrong source
This is about Correctiv. There, on November 17, a fact check was published on an allegedly false quote from DIVI [Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin] President Gernot Marx.
The quote reads: “We are currently registering a strong increase like last year. The big difference, however, is that we have 4,000 fewer intensive care beds available today than in 2020.” (Gernot Marx, President DIVI)
The content of the quote is therefore the significant reduction in beds in hospitals. Correctiv writes: “However, essential context is left out and the myth is fueled that intensive care beds were dismantled in Germany during the pandemic.”
So the dismantling of beds is just a myth? Regardless of the quote in question, this fact can be understood by everyone on the DIVI website.
A rather clumsy attempt to twist the facts.
Regarding the quote, Correctiv claims: “Context is missing: Gernot Marx’s complete statement does not indicate that beds have been dismantled.”
Corrective claims to have researched the quote. The alleged source mentioned is from an interview by the MDR on October 26, 2021, which was quoted in the Ärzteblatt on October 26, 2021.
Professor Marx, how do you assess the current situation in the intensive care units with regard to covid-19 patients?
Gernot Marx: Here at the Aachen University Clinic, the situation is still balanced, but the strain is increasing significantly across Germany. On Wednesday we had 2,136 intensive care patients with Covid-19; 52% of these had to be ventilated. Currently, 60-80 new patients are added nationwide every day In September the situation was stable for a long time with 1,400 Covid-19 patients; now we are registering a strong increase, as in the previous year. The big difference, however, is that we now have 4,000 fewer intensive care beds than in the previous year.
Source: Aachener Zeitung, 4. November 2021
However, the quote is correct and complete, as it was reproduced above, printed in the Aachener Zeitung of November 4, 2021. We would like to take this opportunity to thank the attentive reader who pointed out the incident.
Sloppy research?
The impression that Correctiv gives that the quote is “taken out of context” or misleading is absurd.
The “research network” obviously has difficulties exercising its own core competence — the correct research. What could be more natural than to contact the person involved directly to have the authenticity confirmed? With Correctiv you try to research online instead, but don’t do it thoroughly and end up with the wrong source.
Errors in research happen, no question about it. Especially if there is no editorial team behind the author to check everything again meticulously.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa called for the lifting of travel restrictions imposed as a result of the Omicron variant of COVID-19. Meanwhile, President Joe Biden was photographed shopping in a store in Nantucket, Massachusetts without a mask, where the store required masks.
In other news, a Canadian professor who falsely claimed to be an Indian has been fired from her job.
To see the headlines and the articles, click “Continue reading” below.
Thanks to Caroline Glick, Dean, Reader from Chicago, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.
Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.
Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. I check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from PolitikStube:
Death threats: WEF cancels public meetings in Davos
At the next World Economic Forum in Davos (Switzerland) in January 2022, the public sessions will be canceled due to death threats. These may have come from the scene of Conspiracy Believers, Conspiracy Ideologues, Conspiracy Theorists and Querdenker [lateral thinkers] who not only deny the coronavirus, but also fantasize about a New World Order. Are these death threats actually coming from all of these conspiracy fanatics, or is it just an allegation to defame an entire movement and the unvaccinated?
Conspiracy theories? So some have been uncovered in recent times in reality and through facts, time and again, because the virus has sprung from a laboratory (bred?) in Wuhan.
“The New World Order” —former US President George Herbert Walker Bush spoke about it in 1991, and saw this as a great idea.
The web pages of the WEF hold a multitude of visions of horror that are sold as progressiveness. And too often they come true, if one only thinks of Event 201, the joint simulation game run by the WEF and the Gates Foundation, in which “the pandemic” was war-gamed before it broke out. One such vision is the transhuman human being — “The Internet of the Body” will change our lives, explains the WEF. Body data are supposed to be collected via “implanted, swallowed or worn” devices. For this, data protection should be “overcome”.
Mirror Online:
There will be no public meetings at the next World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January. The decision was made because there have recently been repeated death threats from conspiracy ideologues against employees of the World Economic Forum, report several Swiss media.
“Death threats are the order of the day; it became uncomfortable,” says WEF Director Alois Zwinggi. “We couldn’t imagine that we would end up in the crosshairs of conspiracy theorists.” There are several dozens of such cases every day.
In “lateral thinker” circles and among other conspiracy believers, a story about the World Economic Forum has been widespread since the beginning of the pandemic. Accordingly, the coronavirus is either not real at all or has only been bred so that supposedly secret societies and elites can strive for an authoritarian world government — the “New World Order”. The name of the alleged new world order is closely linked to the World Economic Forum: The forum announced the “Great Reset” initiative to encourage the community of states to cooperate more closely and to improve climate protection after the pandemic.
Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this article from Il Giornale:
In Europe, it is forbidden to say “Christmas” and even to call oneself Maria
November 28, 2021
The internal document of the European Commission: No to the use of “Miss” or “Mr.”, just religious references and Christian names
by Francesco Giubilei
If they had told us, and we had not read it in black and white in an official communication from the European Commission, we wouldn’t have believed it because the contents of the new guidelines for “inclusive communication” are incredible. In a document for internal circulation, of which Il Giornale has come in exclusive possession, entitled “Union of Equality, European Commission Guidelines for Inclusive Communication,” the criteria being adopted by members of the Commission in external and internal communication are laid out. As written in the foreword, the Commissioner for Equality, Helena Dalli: “We must always offer an inclusive communication, ensuring thus that everyone is appreciated and recognized in all of our material, independent of gender, race, or ethnic origin, religion, or creed, disability, age, or sexual orientation.”
To accomplish this, the European Commission lays out a series of rules that don’t just cancel conventions and words frequently used, but also contradict common sense. It is forbidden to use common words such as “workers” or “policemen”, or use the masculine pronoun as a predefined pronoun. It is forbidden to organize discussions with only one gender represented (only men or only women), and furthermore, it is forbidden to use “Miss or Mrs.” except to make it explicit to whom the communication is being addressed. But that’s not all: You cannot open a conference addressing the public with the usual expression, “Ladies and Gentlemen,” but must use the formally neutral “Dear Colleagues”.
The document focuses on specific areas such as “gender”, “LGBTIQ”, “racial and ethnic” themes, or “cultures, lifestyles, and beliefs” with a table indicating what can and can’t be done, based on the intent to regulate everything, creating a new language that doesn’t allow for spontaneity: “Make sure not to always mention the same gender first in word order, or to address men and women differently (for example, a man by family name and a woman by first name).” And further, “When choosing images to accompany your communication, make sure that women and children are not represented in a domestic setting or in passive roles while the men are active and adventurous.”
A desire to cancel the male and female genders reaches paradoxical levels when the Commission writes that it is necessary to avoid expressions such as “Fire is the greatest invention of man,” but it is correct to say, “Fire is the greatest invention of humanity.” It is obvious that behind the redefinition of language lies the desire to change European society, our customs and traditions, as seen in the chapter dedicated to “culture, lifestyle, or beliefs.” The European Commission wants to emphasize “avoiding assuming that everyone is Christian” since “not everyone celebrates the Christmas holidays […] it is necessary to be sensitive to the fact that people have different religious traditions.” There is, however, an enormous difference between respect for all religions and being ashamed of or canceling the Christian roots that are at the base of Europe and of our identity.
In the name of inclusivity, the European Commission goes so far as to cancel Christmas, suggesting that the phrase, “the Christmas period can be stressful” not be used; rather it should be said “The vacation period can be stressful.” A desire to eliminate Christianity that goes further with the recommendation to use generic names instead of “Christian names”, so instead of “Maria and Joseph are an international couple,” you need to say, “Malika and Giulio are an international couple.” The contempt verges on the ridiculous when it requires us to counter the negative connotation of words such as colonialism: It is forbidden to say “the colonization of Mars” or “human settlement of Mars”; it is better to use “send humans to Mars.” When tragedy gives way to farce.
German officials are discussing various options concerning citizens who resist being injected with the experimental mRNA treatment. So far, they have limited their options to fines and forced “vaccinations”.
So far.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from PolitikStube:
Constitutional lawyer on compulsory vaccination: Imprisonment and forced vaccination possible for those unwilling to vaccinate
The Göttingen constitutional lawyer Alexander Thiele believes that a compulsory vaccination is conceivable in order to implement a possible general Corona vaccination obligation. “The possibilities start with a fine, but imprisonment or forced vaccination are also possible,” Thiele told the newspapers of the Funke media group. It is not the aim of a general vaccination requirement that rich people can buy themselves out of compulsion. “The state is not as defenseless as it sounds.”
The decision concerning the consequences of refusing the vaccination is a political one, said the lawyer. This debate must take place in Parliament. “Because the course of the fourth wave does not depend on a compulsory vaccination, we also have the necessary time to think about it and to debate it.”
The constitutional lawyer Christian Pestalozza, for example, considers fines and, in the case of repeated violations, high penalty payments to be possible; as a last step, foreclosure must also be considered. “That means that someone is brought before the vaccination doctor by the police.” In a democracy, however, it shouldn’t get to that point.
Source: Editorial Network Germany
Politik Stube:
Constitutional lawyers who are loyal to the regime and who ignore the principles of proportionality, necessity and appropriateness in the interests of politics, as well as the questionable effectiveness of the “vaccination” plague.
The main thing is that the number of strokes has increased, more threats and psychological terror every day, but pressure, as is well known, also creates counter-pressure.
Afterword from the translator:
These politicians and their puppet-masters seem to think, like all tyrants before them, that they are immune to all because of their power, but they always forget the one simple truth that all tyrants had to learn the hard way: when you make a people desperate enough, there’s no telling what horrors they’re capable of.
Also, their power is the cage within which they eventually will be butchered.
Update: A reader in Australia sends the following clarification about Howard Springs:
Howard Springs is not a ‘quarantine camp’ but rather an evacuation camp in keeping with a long held strategy to remove certain elements of society to safety in the event of war, civil unrest or in this case, disease. These plans have been in place in one shape or form since the close of WW2.
Over the last two years a large concentration health camp has been established in Howard Springs, Australia. It was constructed as a facility to quarantine Australians who returned from overseas during the early days of the COVID-19 lockdowns, and has been expanded since for the internment of unvaccinated citizens and those who test positive for the Wuhan Coronavirus, plus their families and contacts.
Most recently the Australian army (ADF) has been tasked with rounding up people who have been identified as risks and transporting them to Howard Springs.
A longtime reader who uses the handle “the lone rider” sends this brief summary of what is happening at the Howard Springs camp, and its larger ramifications:
I thought people should know of the potential connections with Howard Springs. This goes beyond Covid to the whole central planning/climate agenda and is very worrisome.
Recent news that 38 people were taken by soldiers to the Howard Springs camp in Australia is alarming.
What is more alarming is the puffy prose surrounding the ‘sustainability’ and ‘stylish’ and ‘innovative’ nature of this ‘village’. The group that runs the Howard Springs camp for the Australian government, AECOM, has business interests from Dubai to California ports. Their website touts “delivering a better world through program management” and “Delivering sustainable legacies, our environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategy.” This company is on board with Agenda 2030 for sure, and the buzzwords of that top-down central planning agenda are front and center on its website. They specifically support and are involved in the COP26 climate summit Biden just attended recently.
It should be worrisome that the President of the United States is attending a summit supported by a corporation which manages concentration camps.
This should not only be worrisome, it also makes one wonder: are these camps are merely detention centers to threaten people with for purposes of control during the Covid situation, or worse, are they a model which the government — in Australia or elsewhere — intends to foist on society at large and everyone outside the camp walls, leaning on the excuse of climate change? The explicit touting of COP26 and the ‘sustainability’ agenda on the website of the corporation who runs the camp makes this link even more clear and alarming.
Michael Gunner is the premier of Northern Territory, the Australian state where the Howard Springs camp is located. Mr. Gunner has made a name for himself as the most dictatorial and fascist of Australia’s premiers, and that’s quite an accomplishment in a country where so many pocket Hitlers are currently terrorizing their captive citizens.
In the following video Mr. Gunner makes it clear that anyone who is pro-freedom must be considered anti-vax.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this clip:
On multiple occasions Michael Gunner has spoken about the co-operation of members of the aboriginal community in Northern Territory, who are the ostensible beneficiaries of his forcible relocation policies.
In the following video (hat tip Conservative Tree House), a spokesman for a group of aborigines begs to differ with Mr. Gunner. He maintains that the ADF is not just relocating people against their will, but is also coercing them into being vaccinated. Furthermore, he asserts that foreign soldiers and police officers are included in the squads that roust people out of their homes and take them to the camp:
I don’t need to remind you that what is currently underway in the totalitarian dystopia that Australia has become is a dry run for what will eventually happen in the country formerly known as the United States of America. One important fact to take note of is that Australians are by and large unarmed, but the same is not true of American citizens.
This is a distinction which may eventually make a difference when Spicy Time arrives in earnest.