Health pass: Parliament definitively adopts the bill
By CNEWS with AFP - Updated 07/26/2021 at 9:41 AM Published on 07/25/2021 at 7:54 AM
The Parliament adopted definitively Sunday evening, by a final vote of the Assembly, the bill which provides for the vaccination obligation for caregivers and the controversial extension of the health pass.

After the rejection of a final LFI motion, the deputies voted by 156 votes for, 60 against and 14 abstentions this text which reflects the announcements of July 12 by Emmanuel Macron and had been the subject of an agreement with the senators in the afternoon.


After 60 hours of discussions in total, members of Parliament validated a bill different from the one originally proposed. To begin with, the health pass will be extended in August to cafes, restaurants, fairs and trade shows, planes, trains, long-distance coaches and medical establishments, except in emergencies.

The hotly debated case of shopping centers was the subject of a compromise: overall, the entrance to these establishments will not be subject to the pass, but that of the restaurants located there, yes. However, a government amendment validated at the last minute authorizes the prefects to impose the health pass for certain shopping centers, on a case-by-case basis.

The joint committee also heard the concerns of parents since the obligation to present the health pass for 12-17 year olds has been postponed until September 30
. Knowing that beyond November 15, the health pass system can only be maintained with a new vote by Parliament. Originally, the executive and the National Assembly wanted to extend it until December 31.

Lack of sanctioned control

Until then, offenders will be subject to penalties. For example, the use of a fraudulent pass will be punished by a fine of 135 euros. It will be increased to 3,750 euros and accompanied by a six-month prison sentence if the fraud occurs more than three times in 30 days.

In addition, the lack of control of the pass in a transport will result in penalties for the manager of the latter: 1,500 euros
for an offense, one year of imprisonment and a 9,000 euros fine in the event of verbalization more than three times in 30 days. In the establishments concerned by the pass, the lack of control will lead to a formal notice by the administrative authority, then the place may be closed for a maximum of seven days. If the offense is noted more than three times in 45 days, the manager will incur one year of imprisonment and a fine of 9,000 euros.

The bill makes vaccination compulsory for staff in hospitals, clinics, nursing homes and retirement homes, firefighters, for certain soldiers and for professionals and volunteers in contact with the elderly. The obligation will take full effect on September 15. Only people who can justify a medical contraindication to vaccination may be exempted.

The idea of dismissing people who do not respect the vaccination obligation imposed on their profession has also been abandoned.

They will be banned from practicing and subject to a suspension of their salary.

Any positive screening test for Covid-19 will result in compulsory and controlled isolation. The infected person will have to determine a place of isolation in which he will be required to stay for a period of ten days, not renewable. It will be possible to end the quarantine earlier, on presentation of a negative test. Health insurance will be responsible for monitoring respect for isolation and may call on the police if necessary.

The bill validated by Parliament also extends the state of health emergency in Reunion Island and Martinique until September 30. Guadeloupe, Saint-Barthélémy and Saint-Martin will be subject to the same regime, the day after the law is promulgated. Before that, the text and these various elements must still pass the filter of the Constitutional Council.

🤔 Hmm..?


sure #BFMTV , Jean Michel Claverie, virologist and founder of the French Society of Virology denounces a "State lie"
 
Some people are finally starting to realise the limits of marches when it comes to such a key issue. How can citizens be heard when all the key institutions have been captured?


We’re unorganised, too nice, and waiting for somebody to come and save us. But nobody is coming.

I don't think protestors being disruptive or destructive will achieve the end goal but I feel a new form of protest is required. Peaceful marches are fine but severely limited ultimately as they don't effect actual change and the awareness they create is severely limited if the protests aren't reported on or reported on in such a way that is false.

Destructive protests like the ones of BLM just end up destroying things and gives the government an excuse to use force or create a narrative that discredits those protesting.

So what's left to do? How can people effectively do something? This is the question I think that this movement is facing.

Does anyone have any ideas?
 
Aren’t expanding demonstrations

still a way of making other people gradually start to wake up ? It may, as of now, not do so much in terms of the captured institutions of our “democracy” and their decisions - but if the demonstration movement grows, it may change.

So, mainly it is about to increase the masses, so that more people become aware of that their freedoms are taken away under the umbrella of falsehood. Regardless vaccinated or not vaccinated - because the dark forces ultimately aim at both groups. Anything else would be an illusion.

Or am i just naive here ? It could also increase annoyance, separation and conflict… ? But that lies in the nature of conflict - the presence of duality…
 
Some people are finally starting to realise the limits of marches when it comes to such a key issue. How can citizens be heard when all the key institutions have been captured?




I don't think protestors being disruptive or destructive will achieve the end goal but I feel a new form of protest is required. Peaceful marches are fine but severely limited ultimately as they don't effect actual change and the awareness they create is severely limited if the protests aren't reported on or reported on in such a way that is false.

Destructive protests like the ones of BLM just end up destroying things and gives the government an excuse to use force or create a narrative that discredits those protesting.

So what's left to do? How can people effectively do something? This is the question I think that this movement is facing.

Does anyone have any ideas?

Personally, I think that the most effective form of protest is a strike. If people organize and decide to not go to work or offer their services, causing a disruption in the everyday life of many people, the authorities might pay attention. Kind of like what a hospital in France did recently (sorry can't remember where, but I think it was posted in this thread).

But the people will need to self-organize and the strikes need to be spread far and wide. Not just one hospital in a small community, but a lot of hospitals throughout the country (or supermarket, or petrol station, or mall or school, or fire station, etc). Not holding my breath, the people are already battered, sick and tired and I don't know that most of them understand what's at stake here (even if they resist).
 
Some people are finally starting to realise the limits of marches when it comes to such a key issue. How can citizens be heard when all the key institutions have been captured?




I don't think protestors being disruptive or destructive will achieve the end goal but I feel a new form of protest is required. Peaceful marches are fine but severely limited ultimately as they don't effect actual change and the awareness they create is severely limited if the protests aren't reported on or reported on in such a way that is false.

Destructive protests like the ones of BLM just end up destroying things and gives the government an excuse to use force or create a narrative that discredits those protesting.

So what's left to do? How can people effectively do something? This is the question I think that this movement is facing.

Does anyone have any ideas?

Peaceful marches are essentially a form of petitioning for redress. As such they are predicated upon the notion that the legislative, administrative, or executive authorities are amenable to public pressure, and/or that actions taken in violation of the public will are a result of good faith misunderstanding of the nature of popular preferences that can be corrected via demonstration of what those preferences really are.

That very obviously isn't the case.

As to effective alternatives, there are a few.

1) non-compliance: organized, visible, loud, and insistent refusal to abide by official dictates. This undermines the authority of the system, while also clawing back freedom directly. Forget, being as public as possible about it creates a scene, which then tells onlookers that not everyone is going along with the mandates. This gives those opposed to mandates a bit of courage, as they're not alone, while raising the cost of enforcement/compliance for authoritarians, who will now have to reckon with the likelihood of messy, socially awkward opposition whenever they act to enforce.

2) harrying: systematically naming, shaming, and bullying of authorities and their bootlickers whenever they appear in public. This puts psychological pressure on the non-sociopaths, while normalizing opposition amongst the people.

3) disruptive crowd action: here, I don't mean either extreme of riots or marches/protests, but rather a sort of happy medium between the two. The former aims to destroy, the latter to be heard. What I have in mind is more about interference: preventing the system from being able to effectively operate. As an example, imagine if large numbers of people were to attend vaxx centers or testing centers, then simply refuse at the last minute, thereby jamming up the works.

One way to think about it is in the dichotomy between desire/anticipation and intention, as the C's have discussed. A protest is asking for freedom - an expression of desire. The tactics above are not asking, but are directed with intentionality along a vector aimed at directly achieving liberation, either by practicing freedom (non-compliance), or gumming up the gears of tyranny.
 
Personally, I think that the most effective form of protest is a strike. If people organize and decide to not go to work or offer their services, causing a disruption in the everyday life of many people, the authorities might pay attention. Kind of like what a hospital in France did recently (sorry can't remember where, but I think it was posted in this thread).

But the people will need to self-organize and the strikes need to be spread far and wide. Not just one hospital in a small community, but a lot of hospitals throughout the country (or supermarket, or petrol station, or mall or school, or fire station, etc). Not holding my breath, the people are already battered, sick and tired and I don't know that most of them understand what's at stake here (even if they resist).

Here I think we run into the next problem of which there are a few.

The first and most immediate is organisation. For such strikes to materialise and be effective, you'll need people to organise and agree to strike as it were. This in itself is hard to achieve across unconnected businesses and industries. On this as well, you can anticipate the appeal from businesses to its employees especially those businesses that have not made Draconian measures against its employees. So on this we run into some major hurdles from a practical basis - organisation.

The second problem is the means to participate in commerce. If people strike to bring to a halt the economy, ultimately they hurt themselves because they are the consumers within the economy. Those who live month to month face a greater burden and could not afford to lose a few days worth of work and pay. So here's another problem.

Strikes in isolated pockets e.g. that hospital in France can work as other parts can come in to fill the void but these isolated strikes are limited in their effectiveness. A mass strike would be more effective but the practical limitations make them unfeasible, unlikely to materialise into reality.

@XPan the protests are limited in their reach because of the censorship. The majority of the population here in the UK don't even know protests are taking place. They have zero idea and if it enters their consciousness they think it's just a handful of crazy anti vaxxers and right wingers protesting because that's what the media says if it says anything. So these protests are now at their boundary of effectiveness. It's nice that they are happening and other countries are coming online but these are unlikely to actually result in change or mass awareness.

I think this is a serious problem now because there is definitely momentum and pressure building but there's no release. The people do want change but there's no avenue for that change to materialise into reality. The PTB have cut off all the avenues - the political system is gone, the legal / judicial system is gone, the health system is now fully captured by the pharma companies, the mass media is gone, the scientists are either bought or too scared to speak if they aren't bought etc. All the avenues are cut off!!

I fear the pressure will explode somewhere if nothing changes. It's hard to see where this explosion will come from but I think there will be an explosion somewhere as we're hitting the limits and there's no avenue for release.
 
Personally, I think that the most effective form of protest is a strike. If people organize and decide to not go to work or offer their services, causing a disruption in the everyday life of many people, the authorities might pay attention.

The bolded part is exactly where our thinking must change. Trying to "get their attention" so that they stop attacking us is ineffective. They know full well what they're doing and could care less that it is unpopular.

When dealing with a psychopath, there is no point trying to get them to change. They can't be improved. They are what they are. The only effective solution is to remove the psychopath from influence over your life. In this case, that means acting in such a way as to strip their ability to tell us what to do - which starts with refusing to obey, extends to refusing to publicly pretend they are anything but spiritual waste, and then goes on to active sabotage of their institutional machinery.
 
Here's something rather curious: two announcements in two different countries detailing hospitalised coronavirus patients, the one in the UK states that 60% of patients were double vaccinated, the one in Australia states that all but one were vaccinated, both speakers later retract their statements:
Spending over 1 minute to explain why more vaxxed people were in hospital, then it clearly wasn't just a slip of the tongue.
Therefore taking the 60% at face value as it most likely is the correct figure poses problems to the narrative that vaccines protect against Covid and that the symptoms if one gets it are mild.

The current number of fully vaccinated people in the UK is currently 54.4% (and less when the statement was made last week). If the vaccine didn't protect against Covid infection but was neutral, then one would think that the percentage would be pretty much 54.4%. Since the number is greater, then it points to that the vaccines actually make people more vulnerable to catch Covid.

As for the argument that if double vaxxed people catch Covid, then the symptoms will be milder. Yet, getting to hospital is not a mild condition, but would be classified as a severe reaction. So again the narrative falls as proportionally more people who are double vaxxed are experiencing severe symptoms.

One argument to counter, will be that this is the delta variant and therefore the vaccine is not so effective. Given the 60% figure, then it is not only 'not so effective' against the Delta variant if we go with the variant explanation, but it appears to make people more vulnerable to catch it than is the case with the non-vaxxed people.

Given that this is said by intelligent people, who have many skilled people in the background to look at these numbers and draw logical conclusions, then one can only conclude that they are wilfully lying to the public. In this case Sir Patrick Vallence, the UK science chief, is actually lying continuously as his correction statement is implausible given his initial lengthy explanation and thus also a lie.

When you ask for people to discriminate against other people so openly then you run into some headwinds. When you ask for people to ignore their humanity, then you're essentially asking for the majority of humans to take on a psychopathic nature and I don't know if the majority have it in them to do that. Maybe it worked for the NAZIs because they had something in their nature to make it easy to take on such a cold nature but not all races or groups will so easily take on such an absurdity.
The bolded part does not hold water as it as far as I can see as it approaches the old argument that Nazis were nasty because they were Germans and that other 'races' wouldn't do that. In light of what we have seen over the last 18 months, then I for one have come to better understand how Nazi Germany developed and to understand the great difficulties and choices which many Germans experienced living during the 30'ies and the rise of Nazism. Books like, "they thought they were free" by Milton Mayer and "Defying Hitler" by Sebastien Haffner have been illuminating for me to read.

Yet what we have seen in the last few years with postmodernism, SJW, global warming hysteria, BLM, Antifa, gender-bender ideologies and lastly with Covid, has been the master lesson of how ponerological movements rise and take over the thinking capacities of whole societies leading to enormously destructive results. Nazism was only an example of it and we chose not to learn from it, despite all the rhetoric from the post-war generations of "Lest we forget". So it was not due to socalled racial profiling, but due to an inner orientation of a proportion of people as described well in "Political Ponerology".
Two phrases from the C's stand out in this context: "Nazi Germany was only a trial run" and "United in suffering". At the time when it was mentioned, I found it hard to imagine how such things could come about but now it is not difficult to see at all. It is what we are living to experience and learn from.
 
Had an interesting conversation with an awake young person yesterday. My contractor (who I've talked to about the scam several times, he is dead set against all of it) came over to do some work, and had a 15 year old summer student with him. We all talked about the situation with the vaxx pressure and tyranny, and the young lad told me that he is getting intense pressure from all sides, from friends, school , neighbors, sports organizations he belongs to and even from his own parents to get vaxxed immediately. He is only 15!

My heart truly ached for him, thinking even for us, with all the knowledge we have, how difficult it has been to resist, and yet what this youngster is facing virtually alone is so much worse. He seemed though, to understand very well what was going on, and apparently entirely on his own he has done his research and intends to resist all the pressure come what may. Luckily the contractor he is working for and the other guys on the crew are supporting him. All that I could do was listen sympathetically for which he thanked me profusely.

I confess I was close to tears hearing his story, someone so very young dealing with this tyranny with full awareness of what is going on, while all the adults around him can't see anything.
 
The bolded part does not hold water as it as far as I can see as it approaches the old argument that Nazis were nasty because they were Germans and that other 'races' wouldn't do that. In light of what we have seen over the last 18 months, then I for one have come to better understand how Nazi Germany developed and to understand the great difficulties and choices which many Germans experienced living during the 30'ies and the rise of Nazism. Books like, "they thought they were free" by Milton Mayer and "Defying Hitler" by Sebastien Haffner have been illuminating for me to read.

Yet what we have seen in the last few years with postmodernism, SJW, global warming hysteria, BLM, Antifa, gender-bender ideologies and lastly with Covid, has been the master lesson of how ponerological movements rise and take over the thinking capacities of whole societies leading to enormously destructive results. Nazism was only an example of it and we chose not to learn from it, despite all the rhetoric from the post-war generations of "Lest we forget". So it was not due to socalled racial profiling, but due to an inner orientation of a proportion of people as described well in "Political Ponerology".
Two phrases from the C's stand out in this context: "Nazi Germany was only a trial run" and "United in suffering". At the time when it was mentioned, I found it hard to imagine how such things could come about but now it is not difficult to see at all. It is what we are living to experience and learn from.

I'm just going to come out and say it - black & brown people won't be marching to the beat of this agenda like white people will (as a general rule) no matter how hard they try and convince them that it's in their best interest. Logic and coercion just doesn't work the same way for this demographic. They tend to zero in on what the intentions are and if they sense anything untoward, guards and mistrust immediately go up which act as a wall. The first thing they would ask is "why do you care so much about me and if you do, first show it in a different way rather than convincing me to let you inject me". The existence of coercive systems are immediately taken as proof for negative intent and people immediately revert to a defensive fight for existence mode. Good luck convincing black & brown people, especially the ones lower on the socioeconomic scales. Oh dear, good luck!

This demographic won't necessarily organise or anything like that (especially given no PTB money will be flowing in to organise them like the way a false image of organisation has been formed by organisations such as BLM) but rather they'll find a way to carve out an existence whilst bearing the consequences for non compliance in their day to day lives. I dare say look at the injection rates and divide them by race & culture and a clear picture will emerge.

My comment was generally aimed at this. The PTB won't easily convince these people. It's going to be hard to convince them to take the jab in super high percentages and it's going to be harder to convince them to discriminate against each other based on whether someone has been jabbed or not. Their businesses and communities will probably offer the deepest levels of non compliance in places like France and the like. I bet come August you can go to all those immigrant shops in France and they won't be asking you to show your jab passport and I bet fake papers will be rife in such communities - this is my bet.

This agenda will come to collide with race and immigration in Europe. The agenda will penetrate deeper into the native population but it'll find it harder to do likewise within the immigrant population and soon the PTB will try to make these communities targets. Of course in the native populations you'll have very deep and well organised resistance and this is where the "official" resistance will be mounted and organised but sadly too many will have succumbed to the agenda.
 
Last edited:
A co-worker informed me today that the mother of a friend of hers died 9 days after the second dose of Moderna vaccine from thrombosis, she was 70 years old and in good health. I replied that the saddest and horrible, but unstoppable evidence of elite psychopathology and all their lies, was that people were going to start to see vaccinated people falling around them ... It may be one of the events that may occur about which the C's have spoken ... 🤔
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom