DOLORES CAHILL: Second highest crime [in England] below treason [is] called malfeasance. It's reserved for men and women that dress up as police and judges and coroners and members of parliament who . . . misrepresent the law by making one of your inalienable rights . . . a criminal offense

"The COVID-19 thing and the PCR testing and the masks were really a test to see how far have they have removed people from the knowledge of the law that they would actually accept that people would say you have to wear a mask or you can't travel for 5 miles."

Dolores Cahill, a… pic.twitter.com/FdzstVCFua

— Sense Receptor (@SenseReceptor) November 26, 2024

The COVID-19 thing and the PCR testing and the masks were really a test to see how far have they have removed people from the knowledge of the law that they would actually accept that people would say you have to wear a mask or you can't travel for 5 miles."

Dolores Cahill, a professor, immunologist, and inventor, describes for an audience at Sounds Beautiful Fest 2024 how the COVID-19 operation was, in part, a test to see how far the general population's knowledge of their rights as enshrined by natural law has been diminished. Cahill notes that any police officers, nurses, coroners, etc. who have violated people's rights as enshrined by natural law must now face jury trials; "precedence" examples are particularly important, Cahill notes, as that will deter bad actors in these key professions from committing malfeasance in the future. Partial transcription of clip below. "So what's happening is we have people dressed up as police, so they are paid to defend our right to life, our freedom of travel, our freedom of speech, privacy, and property. So what the system that's been around, you know, to try and push this legal system on is the COVID-19 thing and the PCR testing and the masks were really a test to see how far have they removed people from the knowledge of the law that they would actually accept that people would say you have to wear a mask or you can't travel for 5 miles. And then the strategy was, well, if 95% of the population do it willingly, that then they will just go and target the small number of people that,  you know, were standing up. And that's why we were organizing big rallies in the World Freedom Alliance and in England as all of you were so that if a million people turned up, that would make it more difficult. "But what people don't know is really don't, you know, don't appreciate is that the people who are paid as police constables in England are paid to defend our right to life, travel, speech, privacy, and property. But then there's actually a criminal offense in England today. It's the second highest crime below treason, and it's called malfeasance. And it's reserved for men and women that dress up as police and judges and coroners and members of parliament who actually misrepresent the law by making one of your inalienable rights, for example, a criminal offense, like 10 years in prison. "And then it may take us a number of years to hold them accountable, and the solution is this trial by jury system. But to set up a trial by jury system, you need tens of thousands of people. And that partly what I'm proposing and what a lot of us are proposing is that we run the knowledge of the trial by jury through local co op groups or PMA groups so that if we educate 10, 20 people, you can go back to your community groups and educate tens of thousands of people and then maybe volunteer for a lawful trial by jury, which will then hold a precedence case like a coroner or whatever accountable. Does that make sense? So that's so I think what has been going on and we, you know, don't need to go into it too much, but it's just that the the solution is really this accountability mechanism. "Now while solutions like growing food and detoxing are all very important and developing homeschools, This is kind of a fundamental thing that we don't want this to happen again. And all societies that have crumbled over millennia are that there was some kind of element of coercion through food supply or through slavery or tyranny so that they could enslave the majority of people and then strategically target the individuals standing up. So part of the solution for us is to work together and then put the spotlight back on them and we all then look strategically potentially between the 4 nations, for example, coroners or example, people paid as nurses or paid as police that would be precedence examples."

DEAR W.H.O.: What the heck are you doing? Why are you now recommending masks? Forever you have been not recommending masks for use in the general public because you've admitted there are dangers associated with that

They are doing it again Dennis! https://t.co/2MIhRuHrYz

— Dr. Janci (@JanciToxDoc) October 14, 2024

The masks collect and gather all kinds of pathogen-laden materials near your face eyes and nose and everything.  And then you touch the mask the mask and then you touch the rest of your body.  And so it was thought that there was danger associated with that concentration of pathogens.  And that's why the main World Health Organization did not recommend mask use in a general population is that potentially it was believed to be a dangerous thing making matters worse.  Evidence from 14 randomized control trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory confirmed influenza.  We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning so here's the latest best study in a sense that uses only these very biased-free studies that says look, it doesn't matter if you sanitize surfaces, it doesn't matter if you're washing your hands and masks don't work that's what science tells us and there's good reason for that the reason is that we know and we have known for a decade now that the main transmission route of all o. these types of viral respiratory diseases is very fine aerosol particles that are supported as part of a fluid air.  With those kinds of particles, they're going to get through the sides of the mask.  Even the tiny wrinkles you have on your skin, there is no way you can prevent these aerosol particles from either entering or coming out.  So masks are not going to work under these circumstances but the top scientists have known as forever.  

ROMAN BYSTRIANYK: This tells us that other societal and personal health factors are the most important – not any microbe.

We are still stuck in the idea of the “out there” something (bacteria, virus, etc.) we encounter, and then we get sick and die. No other factors are really ever considered, and the solution has been to use vaccines, masks, isolation, etc., to protect us from this outside enemy.… pic.twitter.com/jzVCJu7TSn

— Roman Bystrianyk (@RBystrianyk) July 31, 2024

We are still stuck in the idea of the “out there” something (bacteria, virus, etc.) we encounter, and then we get sick and die. No other factors are really ever considered, and the solution has been to use vaccines, masks, isolation, etc., to protect us from this outside enemy. Yet, the data show a decline in deaths by nearly 100% with or without a vaccine for all infectious diseases from the mid-1800s to the mid-1900s. This tells us that other societal and personal health factors are the most important – not any microbe. We don’t need to be protected; we must work towards health – whole foods, clean drinks, exercise, sunshine, destressing, etc. It’s like we are stuck in Newtonian physics despite the discovery of Einstein’s relativity and quantum mechanics. Many doctors in the later 1800s and early 1900s understood this, but they were overrun by the PPP of medical men – Profits, Prestige, and Power. 

DR. HARVEY RISCH: [T]his military approach that had people in the military underneath the National Security Council, designed a response that all of our government agencies would carry out, they designed a response that would not follow public health principles

🔥"people in the mid and upper-middle levels of all these agencies...[were] brainwashed by upper-levels of our military establishment that are the professional brainwashers, because that's who the National Security Council pulled in to do the professional brainwashing..." (1/6)… pic.twitter.com/a6BlEZjpbE

— Sense Receptor (@SenseReceptor) May 6, 2024

People in the mid and upper-middle levels of all these agencies...[were] brainwashed by upper-levels of our military establishment that are the professional brainwashers, because that's who the National Security Council pulled in to do the professional brainwashing..." (1/6)

Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale Dr. Harvey Risch (

@DrHarveyRisch

) describes for Jason James (

@jasonjamesbnn

) how the "upper-levels of [the U.S.] military establishment" brainwashed the government, as well as the American people, into believing that things like lockdowns, masking, and the mRNA injections were necessary to defeat COVID. He highlights the fact that the National Security Council (NSC) took control of the "pandemic" response in the U.S. just seven days after it was declared a national emergency, and, echoing the work done by Sasha Latypova (

@sasha_latypova

) and Katherine Watt, says that the FDA's supposed approval of the COVID injections was pure "theater." "[W]hat happened...during the pandemic, is that...FDA, NIH, CDC, all of them, lost control of what would have been their scientific narratives. And they did that because...President Trump...handed [management of the 'pandemic'] off to the National Security Council, which militarized it, which made the pandemic no longer a pandemic, but a biowarfare attack," Risch tells James. The professor emeritus adds that the COVID injections are "not vaccines according to the government" and are, instead, "countermeasures, because it's a military approach that was adopted rather than a public health approach." "[T]his military approach that had people in the military underneath the National Security Council, designed a response that all of our government agencies would carry out, they designed a response that would not follow public health principles," Risch notes. Prior to the NSC's bizarre and harmful "pandemic" response plan, Risch says that prominent public health officials had said that "you don't lock down the population" and that "there's no point in closing airports [as] that won't do anything." He adds that public health officials also knew that "masks are essentially useless—for either protecting the wearer or for controlling source control, meaning keeping the wearer from spreading infection outside of the wearer." "[A]ll of this stuff was all laid out, and then the military turned it around and did the opposite of almost everything. And so, that colored our whole response," Risch says. Explaining further, the Yale professor says that "people in the mid and upper-middle levels of all these [U.S. government] agencies...[were] brainwashed by upper-levels of our military establishment that are the professional brainwashers, because that's who the National Security Council pulled in to do the professional brainwashing..." Risch goes on to say: "What happened is that, basically, your rank-and-file people in the mid and upper-middle levels of all these agencies, are relatively good people who believe in themselves, they believe in the science the way they see it; they believe that they think they are doing a good job, the best that they could under the circumstances, they think of themselves as wholesome, good-doing people. And they [didn't] realize that they [were being] brainwashed. That [they'd] been brainwashed by upper-levels of our military establishment that are the professional brainwashers, because that's who the National Security Council pulled in to do the professional brainwashing of all of our scientific, medical regulatory systems, as well as the general public. And we know how much brainwashing has gone on through the media and all that." "[T]his whole regime of mis-thinking, of propagandized fear and lack of recognition of what were the true issues going on, spread throughout the regulatory approval and scientific review institutions of our government," Risch adds. Touching on the topic of the COVID injections, Risch says that the FDA's VIRBAC (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee) committee, "thought they were doing good by approving vaccines," but were, in fact, "essentially irrelevant." Risch adds that "It was just theater to legitimize that these vaccines weren't vaccines, they were countermeasures and were going to be used anyway come hell or high water, because that's what the military at the top, the National Security Council, had decided, in advance of this whole process unfolding." Indeed, Risch highlights the fact that the COVID injection rollout "was planned this way" and notes that "the military was involved in Event 201, the planning...sessions in September of 2019, and all the previous Event 201s..." that had taken place regularly in the years leading up to COVID. "Why was the military involved? Because they knew the likelihood of a bioweapons attack was grossly, much larger, much higher, than a spread from some animal reservoir into humans. So they were heavily involved in the planning for this and it shows how we carried out all of the pandemic management. Because it was obviously twisted and contorted to be a military response rather than a public health response.

HATECRAFT TO ACCOMPLISH THE POLITICS OF COMPLIANCE

Watch this phenomenal presentation by James Lindsey @ConceptualJames on the The politics of Compliance: The target is You!

Presented at ICS at CPAC pic.twitter.com/g5n1p2YFrO

— Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) February 28, 2024

00:25. A quote from a lesser known dictator and that's Mao Zedong.  In 1957, he not so famously said, "Not to have correct political opinions is like not having a soul."  And I think that that is kind of a banner for the lives that we've been living for the last few years and that's very unfortunate but it's also very telling.  My talk is titled, "The Target Is You."  What I want to talk about is actually "The Politics of Compliance" is the name I've given this and it's actually derived from a strategy that Mao Zedong used, but to make the politics of compliance work the target is actually you.  And I don't just mean you with the wrong political opinions who don't have souls.  I mean everybody.  There are generally three categories of people when it comes to the politics of compliance: 1) there are the people who are complying; 2) there are the people who are refusing, and 3) there are the people who aren't sure.  And all three are targeted by the politics of compliance roughly the same way with the same Dynamic the goal is of course to get the compliant to feel better than everybody else but also frustrated with everybody else it is to convince those who are not sure to join the programming to begin to comply and it is to use the people who refuse to comply as the wedge around which the entire thing turns.  In fact, it's to dehumanize them and motivate the other two groups to try to destroy them.  So Mao Zedong simply took over China with a very small number of conceptual concepts that I'm lumping together in what I'm calling the politics of compliance.  He separated the population into two broad categories I just mentioned.  I just mentioned three, well he cut it into two.  It was an oversimplification, and those two categories are the people, and the enemies of the people.  Not to put too fine a point on it, that's what he called them: the people and the enemies of the people. And what he said is who are the people?  Well, he gives this kind of historical record in 1957 as to who counted as the people, and when.  And there's a consistent running theme through his 8 or 9 different examples of different historical periods of the Chinese story, whether it's the Japanese or the Sino-Japanese War, the second one, whether it's the period of building socialism after he took power in 1949, whether it's during his 1st, 2nd, or 3rd-Year Plan, and the examples all have the single theme of THE people are the people who agree with Mao, and THE ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE are the people who don't agree with Mao.  And it turns out to be really that simple the people at the period of building socialism are those who support the building of socialism and the enemies of the people are those who resist the building of socialism.  He says it explicitly that clearly.  

3:20. And this sets up a dynamic I think the best name for it is Hatecraft, and here is how it works.  The goal of this split is to say that there is a correct perspective on all things, a sacred science (see #5), as Robert [Jay] Lifton described it, and that's called The People's perspective, or at least it was in China.  We could call it whatever, "the critical race perspective on Race"; we could call it "the queer perspective on sexual politics"; we could all imagine a bunch of examples under COVID, "the public health perspective," I guess would be the right name for it.  I see Red Hats in the crowd, you're not allowed to have those.  That's the deplorable side of a different perspective.  But this is the general idea.  There are people who do the right thing.  There are people who do the wrong thing, and the goal is to bring people into the people's perspective, which is also called agreeing with the tyranny.  

4:10. And what you do in order to achieve this idea is that you separate the population into two broad categories, The People and The Enemies of the People.  And then you say,

What we want is unity.  We want Unity but there are certain elements in the population who are preventing us from unity and moving into the future that we can be having, and it's their fault.  The people want to move forward, and the enemy of the people is stopping them.  The people want to open their businesses and go back about their lives, but the people who won't wear masks or take a shot or socially distance or close down their lives or whatever else in the COVID department, are stopping them.  We want to open the country back up, but we can't because there are anti-vaxxers.  They are the problem.

That is hatecraft.

MUST-LISTEN: Audio: Hero Nurse Records Hospital Officials Violating Their Own Policy, The Nuremberg Code and The Law.

MUST-LISTEN.  Nurse Kim Carter recorded her termination meeting on November 2nd, 2023 with Select Medical Hospital in Cincinnati Ohio for mask refusal and enforcement.  

SUMMARY

Kim is not jabbed and knows the harms of the masks and the shots, regardless of the type of shot. She has warned her co-workers, including Dean Blevins (CEO), Lauren Alexander (Human Resources Director), and Jennifer Dreher (APRN, CNO.) well in advance. Kim also submitted her religious exemption to them with peer-reviewed, referenced, proof of harm. Her religious exemption was denied.

Kim was sent home on Monday, October 30th, 2023, and then returned to work on Thursday, November 2nd, 2023. This was the date of the meeting and the recording.

Kim learned of the recent FDA safety signal (regarding the taking of both the COVID shot and the Flu shot), which dropped on the 29th of October, then she warned them on the 30th, the next day. Kim has always warned her co-workers about the harm of masks and shots, and how informed consent is not being given to the patients or the employees.

As a House Shift Supervisor, she was told to enforce Select Medical’s reimplemented mask policy for those who have not taken a flu shot. Their policy is that if you take the flu shot, you don’t need to wear a mask. If you don’t take the flu shot, you have to wear a mask and force others to do so.

Kim refused, based on religious beliefs and medical facts.

They sent Kim home to silence her. Then, she went back on the 2nd of November and they used her religious beliefs about the mask to further silence her, then they terminated her on Friday, November 3rd of 2023.

In this meeting on November 2nd, 2023, Kim was in a room with Dean Blevins (the CEO), Lauren Alexander (Human Resources Director), and Jennifer Dreher, APRN, CNO (the lady on the phone in the recording).

Kim recorded this meeting.

Above is her recording.

Kim is a friend of mine, a mother, and a patriot of the highest order. She has witnessed atrocities at former hospitals where she’s worked and former nursing homes as well, specifically from 2020 up to the current day.

If you can assist Kim in her legal battle, with any legal referrals or legal advice, please reach out to me at:  americaneducationfm@protonmail.com.  

TRANSCRIPT

1:38. So we just wanted to follow up from our last conversation and make sure you're doing okay, and then kind of go from there.  [Insincere: trying to disarm his audience]

1:46. We wanted to touch base with you before you got here.  We left you a voicemail . . . [Getting to business; tries to establish authority in conversation]

1:50. Yeah, I don't know what happened with that [questioning & indicting his intentions]  

1:51. That's okay [Bevins trying to buy back some creds with her; he's failing and flailing]

1:59. How are you feeling.

2:00. I'm still very concerned and I don't know how to make that and I don't know how to make that concern go away because those are significant safety signals I don't know how I'm supposed to feel I feel the way that I feel.

2:18. So I guess from my standpoint my question to you is do you think that you're able to lead the floor as a house supervisor?  Like knowing what you know, knowing where our patients are at, knowing where our staff is at [with] enforcing the mask with the people that don't have the flu shot, do you feel that you're able to leave the floor?

2:45. That's what I've been doing I mean and I'm not going to enforce a mask when I don't know what their religious standpoint is or what their medical standpoint is that's none of my business that's a HIPAA thing.

2:58. But that's a job requirement as a leader.

3:00. You are too enforce the mask when you know that people don't have the vaccine.

3:06. But I don't know because it's medical information that I'm not privy to

3:12. We provide a list of the house supervisor . . . 

3:13. So you're violating people's Medical information

3:17. We don't know what they're

3:18. If you're giving me a list, you're providing me with your personal medical information.  You're violating HIPAA.

3:23. We're following our select policy

3:24. And your select policy is violating your own corporate policy I mean I don't know what you guys want me to do but you're asking me to break the law and I'm not okay with that.

3:35. I just told you what we want . . . 

3:35. So you're asking me to break the law

3:37. We're not breaking the law.

3:38. You are breaking the law . . .

3:39. We're following our policies from slot[?]

3:40. And HIPAA is very clear, and you're breaking HIPPA. 

3:48. No because every leader gets [a list of] who is vaccinated who isn't vaccinated every hospital.

3:50.  But that is not . . . that is their medical history.  Providing somebody with a medical procedure is medical history.

3:58. Kim, we're not going to continue to do this, like this is everywhere, every hospital, every leadership team you get how many people are vaccinated, what vaccination they have, what they're getting, and we have to enforce on the floor our policy.  Our policy is that you wear a mask if you do not have the flu vaccine.

4:16. Okay well I've already given you guys my religious beliefs and my religious exemption and that's where I stand.  I don't know what anybody else is medical status is.

4:26. I wasn't submitting that to you because I was looking for acceptance.  You, you have no right to accept or deny my religious beliefs. You have no right.

Bill Gates & Globalists Wanted to Vaccinate 7 Billion People Worldwide. If It Weren't for the Russians, They May Might Have Achieved Their Objective.

The globalists fully planned on holding all the cards and having full control over this system and the fact that the Russians played along and launched their vaccine first completely collapsed this agenda. 

Episode #349 - Tom Luongo & Alex Krainer https://t.co/pwk7Tf8ueI

— Shaun Newman Podcast (@SNewmanPodcast) December 1, 2022

Tom Luongo and Alex Krainer provide terrific insights on global players, their advantages, disadvantages, and how their respective histories play a role in how they're position themselves against their people and challengers, their competing strategies, etc.  

2:55  Alex says he doesn't know what going on with China--their lockdowns, zero COVID policies, quarantine camps, etc.--he says because he does know that the west is flush with disinformation and misinformation about China.  Says that a lot of the information is coming through the Epoch Times.  Journalists are quoting Epoch Times at face value.  Epoch times is controlled by Falun Gang, which is extremely anti-Chinese Communist Party, or CCP.  Says he can't trust them.  He's been trying to follow actual, genuine Chinese sources, and several westerners who live in China, and what I'm gathering from then is that things are not at all the way that things are being presented in the western media.  What's going on with the zero COVID policy, not sure, but the policy is stupid or it's about something else.  He was surprised to see Russia fall lockstep in line with the World Health Organization, and Bill Gates, and everybody, and take this COVID thing at face value, seriously--do the lockdowns, the masks, the vaccines, everything as the WHO dictated.  You already had the president of Belarus, Lukashenko, who said, "This is all bullshit.  We're not doing this."  At intelligence services, Russia and Belarus are quite tight.  So what was the Russian game?  It became clear the day they launched their Sputnik V vaccine, the first one to launch in the whole world.  The Russians were the first, and they made it immediately available to the whole world.  They gave other countries permission to produce it if 

5:55  The vaccines themselves are secondary.  More importantly, the vaccine was supposed to be the stepping stone toward the COVID passports, which were supposed to be universal.  Look at what Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates have said.  They fully planned on having monopolies on the vaccines.  So western pharmaceutical companies were going to have a monopoly, and they were going to vaccinate 7 billion people.  Remember Bill Gates saying, "Nothing is going to return to normal until 7 billion people get vaccinated."  That would have meant 7 billion vaccine certificates linked to Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, etc.  Once you have the vaccine certificates in place, there's a whole other administration and bureaucracy, IT administration of these rules.  Monopolies over the vaccines would also give them administration over the system.  

Now, if countries adopted Sputnik V, the Russian vaccine, that completely throws a spanner into the globalists' pandemic agenda because now they either have to include Russians in the administration of this system, or they have to give up control over the countries that opt for Sputnik V.  Now, you no longer have monopoly.  What the hell do you do now?  Had the Russians not played along and taken the whole thing seriously, . . . had they said, "No, no, no, we're not buying this.  This is a hoax," then their Sputnik V vaccine wouldn't have been credible.  "Wait, you have a vaccine, but you said the whole thing was a hoax?"  So the Russians had to play along, be part of the system in order to throw a spanner [British for wrench] into it, because it's not just whether you or I couldn't get onto a plane or go into a pub or into a theater, it's much bigger than that because that system you could use to destabilize governments, to trigger social uprisings, you could use it in all kinds of nefarious ways once you have power to control whether in some countries people may travel. people may leave their homes, people may go to work, children may go to school, and so forth.  The globalists fully planned on holding all the cards and having full control over this system and the fact that the Russians played along and launched their vaccine first completely collapsed this agenda.  That's how I work out the Russian agenda.  I don't know how to work out the Chinese agenda.  It's way out there.  

10:03  Krainer thinks that the zero COVID policy in China may be a ruse to shake out foreigners out of China.  This is such heavy-handed harassment that I know people who've said, like, "Okay, enough.  We're packing up.  We're leaving China.  We're not going to live here." It's not zero COVID, because zero COVID is an impossible objective.  

11:00  When Sputnik V was announced, Tom called it the biggest geopolitical tool.  

"Lockdown Moderate" and Parent Guru, Emily Oster, Calls for Americans to Forgive the CDC, the FDA, County Health Officers, Governors, Fauci, Birx, Collins, Gottlieb, Bourla, et al. Sorry, Sister. Never Forget. Never Forgive. Hold the Line.

NEW - The Atlantic publishes a call for amnesty rather than accountability for what has been done to people during the pandemic. pic.twitter.com/sK3TYOxPBC

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) October 31, 2022

Don't make me laugh.  The answer is NO.

The author's name is Professor Emily Oster, a woman who writes about pregnancy and parenthood.  And here she is to tell us to forgive what Fauci, Collins, Scarf-Lady Debra Birx, Scott Gottlieb, your local county health officer in tandem with your governor told us to isolate, to social distance, wear a panty on your face, prevent you from dining out, effectively locking up your elderly grandmother or parent in a convalescent home before killing them.  Yeah, right, Emily, oh, such a pretty Victorian name Emily.

Eugyppius calls her out: Professor Oster is a "lockdown moderate."  Oh, how compromising.  Problem is that she's compromising your health and the nation's economic health.  

I don’t know much about the American pandemic pundits, but I gather that Brown University economist and “parenting guru” Emily Oster is far from the worst of them. Her Twitter timeline suggests she spent the early months of the pandemic terrified about the virus until school closures took their toll on her kids, at which point she repositioned herself as a kind of lockdown moderate, opposing the worst of the hystericist excesses while validating their central premises whenever possible to save face with friends and colleagues.

My unpopular opinion of the day is that I think we may be reaching the limits of fear-based vaccine motivation. And there are downsides to continuing to sow fear among those who are already afraid.

What might work?

-Full FDA approval
-Employer mandates

— ProfEmilyOster (@ProfEmilyOster) July 14, 2021

Oh, I love this, Emily.  Why don't you retreat to your downtown townhome far away from the rest of civilized, real working people, huh? 

Emily Oster’s latest act of moderation is the suggestion that we forgive and forget all the disastrous policies inflicted on us by terrified wealthy urbanites, clueless technocrats and mad scientist vaccinators since 2020, because, hey, these were just honest mistakes, anybody could’ve messed up like that, it’s all good.

April 2020, with nothing else to do, my family took an enormous number of hikes. We all wore cloth masks that I had made myself. We had a family hand signal, which the person in the front would use if someone was approaching on the trail and we needed to put on our masks.  Once, when another child got too close to my then-4-year-old son on a bridge, he yelled at her “SOCIAL DISTANCING!”

These precautions were totally misguided. In April 2020, no one got the coronavirus from passing someone else hiking. Outdoor transmission was vanishingly rare. Our cloth masks made out of old bandanas wouldn’t have done anything, anyway. But the thing is: We didn’t know.

The thing is, Emily Oster, that we did know. We’ve studied respiratory virus transmission for years. All the virologists and epidemiologists who aren’t total morons knew your 2020 mask routine was crazy and they just didn’t care. They wanted you to do it anyway, because they thought that if they got you to act paranoid and antisocial enough, your insane behaviour might have some limited effect on case curves. Joke’s on you, and it’s sad you still haven’t realized.

In fact, instead of an amnesty, Emily.  I give you this: 

Never Forget.  Never Forgive.  Hold the Line.  

Letting them off the hook means to surrender to a horde of troglodytes.  Amnesty for lying Fauci?  This is worst than running press coverage for Fauci, Birx, Collins, who with his wife, pranced a televised version of Puff the Magic Dragon, the way that Che Guevara would televise public executions on TV for their families to witness the horror.  You have a poor grasp of history.  Maybe you spend too much time around babies.  Give that up occasionally to a babysitter once and a while.  Our family members have died and instead of demanding justice, or God forbid just a cessation of all the vaccine mandates, here you are telling us to forgive and forget.  What a POS.  You ignore the fact that people lost lives, we lost loved ones, brothers, sisters, cousins, parents, family, dear Emily, and your call for amnesty is the rudest insult.  

This video is in response to the @TheAtlantic article about “pandemic amnesty” and it’s a much watch. This man is so right on. pic.twitter.com/ZuuA9tIloD

— Just Mindy 🐊 (@just_mindy) October 31, 2022

Why not ask us to say to these monsters, "Ah, no big deal, no harm no foul" only to let another few years go by before they introduce something else and you're not going to be in any position to help yourself ore your family or friends.  Read this by eugyppius.  

And finally, check out this post with Professor Oster's tweets on lockdowns.  Lovely gal, isn't she?  

When it comes to those who forced lockdowns & drugs on unwilling people now seeking amnesty, an eternal principle stands out: #NeverForget #NeverForgive #HoldTheLine

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) October 31, 2022

Lockdown Proponent Calls for Amnesty – But Where’s the Apology? https://t.co/V7TLYfWy5a

— An Avenging Angel (@aveng_angel) November 14, 2022

IRISH HEALTH MINISTER, STEPHEN DONNELLY: "I mean there's oodles of data."

"Can you name a study?": Irish Health Minister Stephen Donnelly pressed on the effectiveness of face masks, as he floats the idea of reintroducing them this winter.  https://t.co/MWPibuFRaN pic.twitter.com/lfF3wr9RTm

— gript (@griptmedia) October 18, 2022

Well, I don't live in Ireland, but I do live in the U.S. where I've seen schoolyards of children wearing masks, not because of any condition they have or any condition they might threaten their classmates with, but because of remote, unaccountable, invisible authority: the county health officer.  

But I do love the language that these official tools give to reporters.  

You may mandate COVID masks this winter, but according to a major report by Ofsted in the UK earlier this year.  There's evidence that face masks could have stunted many children in social and language development.  So I'd like to ask with these known risks, what real-world evidence do you have that masks significantly reduce COVID-19 not based on models but actual real-world examples.   

00:25  So first of all, there is no expectation we will be moving to mask mandates.  Obviously, Ireland does what every other country will have contingency plans in place should there be a variants of concern that out competes Omicron that is a high ratio in terms of severe illness and that escapes the vaccines.  

My comments:  So this was something.  He's admitting that Ireland's response will be just like every other country's response.  Like China's?  Like Austria?  How about Australia?  There's no greater admission or concession that says we defer to a higher central authority than our own nation.  We defer to the International Communist WEF, Davos, and the EU.  These are our gods.  

00:45  The public health advice I have is unambiguous [meaning he'll change his advice next week] on the use of masks.  Masks are important.  We have public health advice in place right now.  They do work.  They do save lives.  And they have been an incredibly important part of our response to the . . . to the pandemic.

01:00  What real-world examples do you have of that other than just saying that they work? 

01:07  I mean there's oodles of data.  There's data all over the world.  There's no serious argument being had in terms of whether face masks . . . there's no serious argument being had in the medical community as to whether face masks are an important public health measure.  Are there trade-offs, are there trade-offs in children wearing masks?  Yes, there are, and those things are taken very seriously, and they are counted for in terms of public health advice.  But in terms of living through a pandemic, there is no serious debate as to whether face masks are an important public health measure . . . .

01:48  Could you name a real-world public health study that shows that . . . ? 

01:51  I will ask the Chief Medical Officer to send you any number of studies to that effect.  Yep, no problem at all.     

Hypercapnia, i.e., CO2 retention, caused by mask wearing reduces blood flow to the kidneys

Aside from being an instrument of torture, masks are terrible for your health.  Is that part of the torture?   

I always knew masking 😷 your face was not a good idea and here's why. https://t.co/jKm7q6WOme

— Michelle Odvody (@MichelleCalliha) October 4, 2022

Hypercapnia, or impaired kidney function.  Your kidneys are trying to decrease the level of acidity in your blood, so they're actually doing a lot to retain, basically to balance the Ph so it really puts a lit of stress on the kidneys to balance the Ph and the salt, and it reduces blood flow to the kidneys and in many cases can lead to chronic inflammation or nephritis.  No one is even talking about this.  Anyone measuring it in our kids?  No. I don't think so.  We have a sleep apnea model of hypercapnia that also causes a lack of oxygen and what they see in these people is altered postural stability, altered ability to sensor environment known as proprioception, altered gait and increased falls.  This is what it looks like when your brain is not getting enough oxygen.  This is not rocket science.  In the context of our children, their brains are still developing and yet we think it's okay to deprive them chronically of oxygen.  We have mitochondria that produce ou energy.  And there is biochemical evidence that masks are damaging our mitochondria because they're trying to work in an environment where it doesn't have what it needs.  Again, the body is out of homeostasis and it's put in a place where it's constantly trying to adjust but it can't adjust because you won't take the mask off.  

CDC DIRECTOR, DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY: "We're all in this together," except when it comes to you getting hurt or dying, or losing abilities that allow you to work

You need a bullet to the forehead! pic.twitter.com/AzPGwAT7B6

— NiCoLeEliSei (@NiCoLeEliSei1) June 20, 2022

How does she get away with saying, "We have taken another important step together in our fight against COVID-19 by making safe and effective vaccines available for our little ones"?  I mean she's not "in this together" when people suffer vaccine injury and death.  "We have taken"?  Really, I don't remember agreeing to anything related to the masks except being forced to wear them while interacting with customers.  I never agreed to it.  I was forced to, threatened to wear them.  But my former employer didn't coerce me or other employees with vaccine mandates.  But the local stores did.  Oh, yeah, the stores posted signs that read, "If you are vaccinated, you're not required to wear a mask."  Mighty nice of them, except that I wasn't vaccinated and yet I still entered the store without a mask.  

I hope that everybody is realizing now, by now, that this whole pandemic was not about your safety nor was it about your health.  You do know this, correct?  Here is more conflicting testimony.  FDA official, Peter Marks, explains that the vaccine produces 5x more viral myocarditis than what would normally be occurring.  Really?  Do you mean to tell me that myocarditis was a thing in the past, that it was a thing prior to the COVID-19 vaccines?

FDA official Dr. Peter Marks says vaccinated kids have a 5 fold increase of myocarditis. Why on earth are they pushing the COVID vaccine on babies? We still don’t know the long-term safety profile of these vaccines. pic.twitter.com/Ya3jdR3zRl

— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) June 16, 2022

Wouldn't you assume that the CDC Director knows the claims publicized by the FDA?  Or is it a case, like the FBI and the CIA, that they are competing agencies with each one fighting for a more supreme legitimacy?  Marks serves as the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research within the Food and Drug Administration.  So to answer my question, maybe they don't communicate at all.  There would, in fact, be no need to.   

Though I think for some of the younger members of our society who have little experience and little knowledge of how our government, and government in general, is more often in service of murdering you.  Think about the wars, how they send young men off to die in a foreign land in which they have no real skin in the game or no epidermis in the competition.   How many Mengeles does the United States have exactly?  Wait, did I read that right?  Fun Fact: Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Chief Medical Advisor to the President (who is NOT Jewish) was awarded Tel Aviv University's Dan David Prize with $1 million, for "speaking truth to power" amid the COVID-19 pandemic."  What a pantload. 

Tal Zaks is Chief Medical Officer of Moderna.  Since 2021, he's been on the Board of Directors at TEVA Pharmaceuticals.

Billionaire, Leonard Schiefer, Founder [co-founded it in 1988] and CEO of Regeneron.  A few highlights of Schiefer's success: 

Leonard Schleifer cofounded drugmaker Regeneron in 1988 and remains CEO of the Tarrytown, New York company.

Schleifer took Regeneron public in 1991; he owns nearly 4% of the company's common stock.

Sales of Regeneron's blockbuster drug Eylea, a treatment for macular degeneration, reached $4.6 billion in the U.S. in 2019.

Regeneron has developed six FDA-approved medicines.

In June 2020, Regeneron began clinical trials of a new antibody medicine to prevent and treat people with Covid-19.

Rachel Levine, born Richard Levine in 1957, became a "woman" in 2011, Levine is an American pediatrician and a 4-Star Admiral in the United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.  He has been the United States Assistant Secretary for Health since March 26, 2021.  Appointed by Biden, of course, the WEF's man in the White House.  Regardless of where these folks got their medical or health degrees, be assured that they're top graduates from CLOWN COLLEGE.

Jeff Zients, Albert Bourla, Mikael Dolstein, Sherri Berger, Ann Schuchat, Dr. Rocelle P. Walensky, current Director of the CDC.  Regarding psychopath, Dr. Rochelle P. Walendsky, you really should give this a listen.  This one too.  She's had zero credibility, and yet here she is advocating that children under 5 get 3 vaccine doses, let me remind you, for a disease that DOES NOT EFFECT CHILDREN.  

BUSINESSES ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW . . . they can't make you take a line of cocaine as a condition of coming into the store . . . [They're] not your own legislative body.

John Jay Singleton is a consultant from Orange County, Florida.  His website is called Ace of Coins.  You'll find a "Help" link on that page where you write a message to John.  

Laws are not written to give you rights.  Laws are written to restrict those from violating your rights.  --Peggy Hall

 

To be clear, Peggy makes a joke when she says that companies can do anything, hey, they're a private company. A few conditions with that. One, when a company claims to be private, what they're claiming is that they're not government-owned the way some are under communism. Two, privately owned does not mean they're a private club that requires annual or monthly dues and access is only to men or to white men or rich men.  Three, businesses are not above the law or cannot violate their own law in their own corporate charter. 

Here is a 56-page guide on how to sue Sprouts. 

Watch “HOW TO SUE SPROUTS OR OTHER BUSINESS — Peggy Hall with John Jay Singleton” on #Vimeo https://t.co/7pWL3byR4U

— Mike Walgenbach (@mwalgen44) May 28, 2022

7:00. "Grocery store won't let you in?  Okay, that's false imprisonment."   

Don't have to sue Sprouts but you can put them on notice. 

12:55. "You have a right to rely upon the law.  . . . you want to pick a fight and win it."  There's a money interest behind everything we're seeing.  Sprouts is the bad boy.  Let's see who is out there that's going to make the rest of us pay.  Fine.   

14:09. Put them on notice.  1.  Notify the Chief Counsel.

So many holes in their scam that if they succeed in what they're doing, it's on us. There's no reason why they should prevail in this . . . the moneyed interests who want us to submit. 14:47.  

16:30. Document what's going on. 

17:22. It's illegal to stop you.  It's illegal to stop your path.  It's illegal to touch you.  Illegal to prevent you from continuing to walk.  

18:14. If you're walking into any business that is open to the public, and they try to stop you it's a crime.  It's known as unlawful restraint or false imprisonment to prevent you from going somewhere. Even if you have the freedom to leave that area, your liberty to go into that store available to anyone else has been strained against your will and that's a crime.  The person doing that to you can be arrested.

18:50. Making a scene is not our solution.  Documenting it is where we win.  

18:55. Understanding your right when you walk in the store no matter what anyone says to you.  You can ignore them and keep on walking.

19:02. You don't have to tell them anything.  If they physically restrain you, that's another issue. 

19:27. If Sprouts intends to deny services to you, you'll be informed of that.  The manager will tell you.  What happens when the manager sends over their monkees?  He and his friend both got banned from Sprouts.  That's not winning.  

20:04. My manager said I can't sell this to you.  

Are you denying me service because of the disability I have? 

MGR: No, we're not doing that because you won't comply with the law!

20:12. Well, I just want to get confirmation that I'm being denied services because I have a disability. (Get that admitted somehow; have that discussion)

And I got his name, that's important too.

NOTICE OF DISCRIMINATION, an incident report form. Not a legal document but it's very satisfying.  Date, person's name, what they look like, this is the name of the store, here's what went on, serve it to the person, snap a photo of it, so you have a record and a document.  

21:38. Get them to acknowledge it in some way.  Incident report becomes an element in a cause of action.  A Cause of Action means you CAN sue them, but you don't have to.  Include a one-half-page letter to the CEO, the Chief Counsel, this is an attorney now and his job is to manage risk for the ENTIRE COMPANY.  He measures out the insurance rates, consults with the insurance companies, and tells the store what its policy should be regarding . . . spills.  

Document it and you're halfway there.  But you also want to get the person who is responsible for that facility, for the premises at that time.  You'd be surprised.  We went ti Planet Obstacle recently and the cashier want me and my 2 little girls to wear masks.  And I asked, "Are you the manager for this facility right now?"  He says yeah.  I said are you responsible for the entire facility at this time?  Then he weighed it and said yeah.  That means something to these people.  Okay, you're requiring medical intervention for me and my two daughters.  So if I act upon your medical intervention and have them wear a mask like you're saying, and they go out and play and you've not conducted any medical examination, so you don't know their medical history at all, nor are you competent . .  is there a physician on-site?  So are you willing to accept the responsibility and liability if one of my daughters collapses in an unconscious state?  Do you have insurance for this?  

He said, look, you guys don't have ti do all that stuff.  He was going to let us come in for free.  

I'll pay.  I just want to see where we are here with liability.  Next thing he knew, all the kids in the place took their masks off and had a good time.  Parents took their masks off because they saw my family without their masks on, so . . . .

24:09.  So bring the store manager over and get that person to identify, and admit, that he or she is responsible for that entire property.  Then you get them to say, "Okay, are you denying me services now?" and Because the reason is that I am unable to wear a mask, or am unwilling because it violates my religious convictions.  And no matter what, no matter what they, they're going to deny you the service, you're done.  Then leave.  You don't have to push it to where the police come.  

24:45  The other day, the police did show up because the manager was flustered.  While he called the police, other customers heard the conversation and they came out and said, "Yeah, this is crazy.  We shouldn't be doing this."  this was at Sprouts.  I went with a client, who was in the area.  Cop arrives and asks if they're the guys the manager called about, and he said yeah, and the cop said, well, have a nice day.  

25:35  ***If the police are called, that is cause for more damages.  The cause is exacerbating the situation unnecessarily.  He didn't need to do that.  There was no . . . 

25:50  When a business is open to the public, it has its own policies.  They can make their own policies, but they still have to be within the confines of the law.  They can't run, which they're trying to do, a demonic cult, right?  They can't make you take an aspirin or a line of cocaine as a condition of coming into the store, right?  They can't make those kinds of policies obviously.  Sure you guys can make whatever policy you want but you still can't break the law.  You're not your own legislative body.   

26:45  Peggy:  Police show up and say, "Store policy, store policy."  I never want to hear that again.  Bring the NOTICE OF DISCRIMINATION WITH YOU WHENEVER YOU ARE GOING OUT.  Add the name of the manager.  You're very calm, you're polite, and you say, "Hey, I just want to be sure that you're requiring a medical intervention, so are you the physician on staff?" and they'll go "No."  Can I talk to the person in charge of the facility?  They come over and you confirm, "So, you're in charge of the entire facility at this time?" and they will either say yes or no.  You get their name as well and say "I just want to see where we are here with liability because you're requiring me and my kids to wear a mask, and you know, you're not their doctor, you haven't examined them, so I want to make sure that if something bad happens--do you have the liability to handle this?  Don't blow it out of proportion.  Hopefully, it's not going to escalate to where the police come.  If they deny you, you fill out that INCIDENT REPORT, which you will use when you do the CAUSE OF ACTION, which might be suing, it might not, but if they call the police, that actually makes your case even stronger because that was an unnecessary action.  If they charge you with trespassing and they ask you to leave, it's a good idea to leave.  You don't want to damage your stance by being belligerent, or by causing a public nuisance, but you want to have the strongest course of action possible.  If you are being harassed . . . I've had a Healthy American member who was being pelted with walnuts in bulk, someone taking a clump of them and throwing them at them.  That's assault.  And that's when you call the sheriff and you say I'm reporting a crime in progress.  

30:15  Think of it as a Slip and Fall.  That's exactly the liability that that property owner or manager has.  Now sometimes they're covered, and sometimes they're not because there's an issue of negligence for which they would not be covered.  An example would be breaking the law and resulting in an injury.  So here's an example.  I walk into a store, and the guy with a mask says, "You must have a mask or else you can't come in here," and he blocks my way.  Okay, that's a crime right there.  What crime?  Because the moment I have a civil cause of action, I also have a criminal cause of action.  

31:00  Florida statutes, 687 or 681, if you're wearing a mask, usually that's not a problem.  In some jurisdictions, or in some cases, that is a problem to wear a mask, or it used to be.  If you're wearing a mask now, and you're doing a certain thing, that is literally a crime.  [Okay, John, I need specifics here.]  That's a 2nd-degree misdemeanor in Florida.  So a person who's an employee of a business who is standing at the entrance, who gets in your way and says you can't come in here unless you do a thing, whatever that is, that's a crime.  It's also an assault.  I'm not saying these people need to be prosecuted, but just realize what your rights are and what their obligations are, and realize what the law is.  It's assault when you feel intimidated by someone wearing a mask.  That's the definition of assault.  That's a trespass on you.  It's called a TRESPASS ON THE PERSON.  There are a lot of trespass issues, so let me explain how that works.  

32:24  When you're walking into a retail place of businesses open to the public, it is not a private membership association; it's not a private club.  It's open to everybody, whoever you are.  Obviously, you've got to wear clothes, right?  Obviously, there are standards that we have: you have to have shirts and shoes.  It is not trespass when you're in a public building and the manager tells you to leave for any reason.  If the manager calls the cops, and the cops tell you to leave, the cop can then give you a trespass warning . . . .  They can make it to where you can never go back there unless you want to be arrested.  That has to do with how the legislature wrote the language in the statute.  You can get out of that, but you have to argue the case.  You've got to be in court.  I recommend avoiding that but understand this: when you go into a store, you have an irrevocable license to be there.  Why?  Because it's open to the public.  It's an irrevocable license.  A license is the privilege of being there.  The privilege was extended by all the investors, store owners, and managers that opened the store up and said, "Hey, guys, come on in and buy our stuff."  That's the privilege.  Now, if I go over to my neighbor's house next door and open the door and walk into his kitchen, open the fridge and get some pudding or something, that I don't have a privilege for.  He can shoot me for that.  

34:00  I do have that privilege at Publix.  So, for someone to come along and impose illegal requirements or act in an unlawful way is a trespass against you.  You are not trespassing.  Now because you have an irrevocable license does not mean that you can do anything you want.  If you disrupt the business or you hassle people, make a scene . . . you have to really hassle people.  If you call the manager for help on something, that's not really harassing anybody even though the manager may not want to talk to you.  But because you have an irrevocable license, it's not trespass unless there is a violation, and that's a keyword.  For example, if someone calls the cops on you, the cops understand this part of it.  they're trained differently.  Sometimes you can talk to them if you want to talk to them.  Understand that you have an irrevocable right to be there, so if the cops show up . . . and let's say that you were shopping and someone decides to call the cops on you even though you've done nothing, if the police say, "Look, the manager called us and says that you're trespassing,  [35:11] and he wants you to leave, your response would be "Has there been a violation?"  And you'll watch the police officer--he knows what that is.  You're trying to persuade anyone; I'm not trying to win an argument with a cop.  What you're trying to do is document what is going on here.  "I talked to Officer Jones, on this date, at this time, apparently the manager called the police on me while I was shopping.  At the time, the store was open to the public, as they always are, and I asked the officer if he had any evidence of any violation, "Do you have evidence of any violation?"  Am I being accused of violating the public peace, breaching the peace, harassing anyone, what type of violation is it, Officer?  Now, you're not trying to be flippant with him or anything.  You literally want to know.  See what his response is and make a record of this.  You've got to write it down, take a picture, do a voice recording onto your phone.   If there's been no violation, there is no trespass.  There is no trespass unless there's a violation.  

37:00  When the cops come out, you can be removed if there is a violation or if there is no violation.  And if you want to challenge it, there are causes of action that are civil.  You can also challenge it by going the route of getting arrested, which I don't recommend. Not sure you'd win the case if you allowed yourself to get arrested . . .because it's not necessary.  It's a civil matter but you can win on the fact that there's been no violation. 

37:25  And the judge might say to you like, "What's the problem?  Why don't you just leave?  You're in the right but why didn't you just leave?  For example, one store wouldn't let us in, so we left and just shopped elsewhere.  We sued them.  

38:00  So the judge asked, "You sued them, why did you go back there?"  Use your head a little bit and be rational.  So just because you are right, don't act righteously.  Yes, you're right.  I know they're wrong.  Just be patient.  This might take a few months.  Work gets around.  Just 3 people led 15 people.  Here's where we win guys: identify to the organization the financial risk. It's not about like what you see in the movies, where you win a case and like civil action and the jury finds in your favor, and . . . it's not going to happen.  It doesn't work that way.  Most cases do not end up before a jury, and most cases in this country do not go to trial. Most cases are resolved in summary judgment.  So, you document what's going on.  You get the responsible people.  If there's an issue of trespass, realize where there is a trespass.  It's a trespass to the person if you're being threatened or intimidated by someone with a mask.  It's an irrevocable license if you go into a business that's open to the public.    

39:36  There has to be a violation before there is a trespass.   And what's interesting is that there needs to be 2 witnesses.  A cop would be a witness and the store manager.  If there's a violation, there needs to be a witness.  You don't want to be a witness against yourself.  So by engaging in something that is disruptive, you become a witness [40:00] . . . against yourself.  Why do that, right?  [Oh, God.  Had never put that idea into those terms.  Wow.]  Live your life, go through the process, and if you encounter this, understand what your rights are and document what is happening, and then you can take it to the responsible people.  So the next level would be, you would leave the store.  In a lot of places that are providing services would be like a barber shop . . . it's different than a store because they'll tell me to wear a mask at a store, but I'll ignore them.  I mean I'll go in there to buy my stuff and they deny me services; there are only one or two stores that deny me services.  But in a barber shop, the barber can just say, "I'm not going to cut your hair."  It's not so easy; it's not like I'm just going to pick something off the shelf, right?  So in a case like that, if you really like the place, like my dentist, like Peggy did a great thing with the dentist thing . . . I haven't tried that yet.  You talk to the people rationally, "I already took my temperature, I already talked to the dentist, I'm just going to walk down the hallway . . . I'm not going to wear a mask, I feel it's the mark of the beast, or whatever.  

41:00  [PEGGY]  It's not just about the masks.  The reason we're talking about the masks is that you will be denied entry.  This is a test case, a trial balloon.  And somehow, Sprouts raised its hand, and was selected, or appointed to be the most militant of the retail grocery stores, because some are really easy-going.  I've never been denied in Ralph's.  One sweet little girl was following me around, she looked so scared to tell me.  They're being paid to enforce these unenforceable laws.  [Just as hospitals get incentives from Medicare and Medicaid to record a death as COVID and diagnose the flu as COVID, retailers get paid by the government to enforce illegal rules on its paying customers.  It's bigger than the mask.  It's about freedom.  We have free and equal access to public places, to the courts, to schools, health clinics, hair salons, and dentists.  I'm going through it with our local swimming pool and they want to take your temperature.  

Why do you want to take the temperature?  

We're following the guidelines . . . 

And you know the guidelines aren't law, right?  

Yes, we know, but it's our duty to keep everyone safe.  

Oh, safety!!  I have an idea to make it even more safe!!  You don't want me showing up if I have a fever, do you?  

No, that's why we take your temperature.  

How about if I take my own temperature at home?  And if I have a fever, I won't show up.  Wouldn't it be horrible if someone took my temperature and there I was standing in front of them with a fever?  Breathing on them?       

They don't know what to say.  You caught them on it.  If you want to do this Gustapo safety thing, I will give you safety!  Because I'm relentless like you are John, and I'm never going to give up.  If you say this, I'm going to find that.  If they say do X, I'm going to do X.  One of my adages is that there's always another way, and I'm going to find it.  There's always another way.  If you're afraid about the temperature, then I'll take my own temperature.  No, no, we have to see it.  Well, I will take my own temperature with a thermometer that I bought at CVS.  Because I do not give you permission to undertake a medical intervention.  Now, it is a little tricky at the doctor.  The last time I went to the doctor was about a year ago, they did take my temperature and they also took my blood pressure, because I was at the doctor's office.  That, to me, is not as egregious as going to the dentist.  So I called the dentist and gave them the same schpiel, and they said, "Ah, that totally makes sense."  One of them said, "Why don't you just snap a picture of the temperature reading on your phone and send it in?"  That would be more sanitary if I have to sneeze than a mask would be. [45:39]    

Don't lose your cool.  Don't act righteously even though you're in the right.  Because this is about the long game.  I am astonished that people.  46:30  Got to plan in advance.  Got to know which stores are friendly, which ones are not.  The bigger issue is to not let a business trample over your rights under some pretend banner of "We have the right to refuse service."  Yes, they do but they can refuse you service only if there is an incident.  Don't surrender your rights up freely.  Do not comply.  There is a way to be defiant that will actually serve you.

47:35  

1.  Document what is going on. 

2.  You have an irrevocable license for a place of business.  

3.  There has to be a violation of trespass. 

4.  Don't argue with the cop.  This isn't the place to do it.  

5.  You need 2 witnesses.  

They need it to prosecute a case, but you're never going to get there.  You just want to document everything, and then get out of there.   

The property rights issue we're talking about here is a testing ground to see how many people will give up their rights.  These are property rights, these are not constitutional rights.   You don't have a Constitutional right.  48:22  The Constitution is supposed to restrain government.  We had rights like that before they had written laws.  If we don't stop this, and we don't find those testing grounds, like Sprouts, get them, and put a stop to it now, they're going to conclude that their model is working and all we need to do is spread it out now.  We need to jump on those, and that's why I am doing this.  

48:47  Property Rights.  Okay, this is where most of society is being taxed out of existence.  It's through taxing people's intangible property rights.  An intangible property right is something like deciding what I am going to wear today.  Also, my right for no one to hear a conversation I am having unless I want them to.  That's called a Privacy Right.  Privacy is a property right.  It doesn't come from a law.  It's a human right.  But who defends human rights?  That's why we have all of these written statutes, like the Patients' Bill of Rights.  These are basically telling the insane people, like corporations, right, what rights people already have and what restrictions you have, you insane corporation.  BTW, corporations are defined as insane persons.   

PEGGY, 49:50  Laws are not written to give you rights.  Laws are written to restrict those from violating your rights.  

We're all born with God-given rights.  Property rights [your body] and privacy right [preference for exclusion].  And these other Bill of Rights are there to explain to others clearly so they understand where the line is and they may not violate those rights.  

We're not just trying to cause trouble in society.  There's something else going on here, and we realize that.  Viruses are not contagious between people anyways.  COVID-19 is not a virus; it doesn't exist.  it's never been isolated.  There are no documents on it.  Someone has patented it, I believe this CDC, has patented the genetic material that they modified and they called it COVID-19.  The human body has about 18 Coronaviruses.  The human body makes coronaviruses to clean itself.  They cannot, do not, travel in the air, they're not in a place, you don't have to wipe everything down all the time, don't wash your hands with sanitizers.  Ther's methanol in that; that'll kill you.  About 70 to 90 brands have methanol in them.  That's the other part of this: COVID-19 is not a contagious virus.  and viruses are not contagious between people, bacteria are but not viruses.  A virus is a cleaning agent made by your human body.  It's like saying, "Ooh, we found that everybody has red blood cells."  

52:40 PEGGY  Take away cholesterol, and it induces Alzheimer's.  My dad died at the hands of medical terrorism.  The reason it's important to explain this stuff, friends, is there's a larger agenda at work, and we have to be on our toes, be on our toes about the medicine, about the science, about the social implications, and our focus today is on the legal remedies.  [This is a Florida department] 

53:30  JOHN, We can do this at any place where you're having this problem.  You can do this with anyone.  There is always an intake form for the Department of Health.  Now the Department of Health is behind this scam.  But the Department of Health is supposed to police situations where people who are not authorized or licensed are giving medical advice.  Brief story:  we went to Applebee's the other day, and we couldn't sit down without wearing a mask.  Of course, I'm not going to do that.  I'll never do that, so my wife just called up another Applebee's and we went to the other one and we were fine.  So I do the thing I always do, I ask for the floor managers, but in this case, the guy was the General Manager.  Got him to admit, yeah, you can't wear a mask.  So I documented all that.  So I filed a complaint with the Department of Health on their own form, explaining that there's an employee at AppleBee's restaurant who is requiring patrons to undertake a medical intervention as a condition of patronizing the restaurant.  So I filled out this form and sent it to the DOH, they called me a couple days later to ask "What's up with the complaint at Applebee's?  I said it concerns a restaurant.  She said for that I would have to contact the Department of Business and Professional Regulation [This is a Florida department.]  Well, I already know that.  And I know who I'm supposed to be calling.  Well, actually this concerns Section 456.065, and she goes "Oh, really?"  I said yeah, there's an individual at the store who is imposing medical interventions as a condition for patronizing the restaurant.  And she goes, "Well, we definitely need to see all the facts on that."  So she goes, "Let us review everything and let us get back to you."  So the DOH is behind pushing this, and so is the Department of Business.  They're probably doing that in your state too.  It's not just the DOH, [55:34] they're using other agencies.  And now they're supposed to prevent people from giving medical advice who are not trained and qualified, insured, and licensed and all this stuff.  Do you know why there's licensing?  To get licensing, you're affecting the public.  You don't need a license to cut grass, but you do need a license to advertise to cut grass for someone else because you're open to the public because there's a risk to the public, so licensing allows the government body to regulate it, it also allows insurance carriers to gauge [56:08] their risk.  Because you've succeeded in getting a license, therefore, you must be insurable.  It all works together.  It really works well.  Sometimes, I don't like the licensing issue, it does work pretty well as long as it's not abused.  So when you have someone who is completely not licensed, who would never qualify for a license who's engaging in this, it would be like a person who is playing with fire at a daycare center.  That's how insurance looks at it.  [56:32]  So by filing a complaint with the Department of Health over violations of unlicensed practicing medicine, also denying you informed consent in that situation is another legal violation.  I don't know if it's an "unlicensed to practice medicine," but it is a legal violation in the medical area.  Informed consent requires that you be informed before you are given a chance to consent or not.  So you cannot be informed of a medical procedure unless you've been given all the pertinent information that's available to the physician who is going to consult with you.  You cannot have informed consent unless there's a licensed physician.  So a store manager, a restaurant owner, not going to [cut] do it, so you're already denied informed consent.  Along with the illegal medical intervention.  I mean that's a big issue.  Informed consent, you can slam on that all day long.  It's a big liability.  So now you've got a particular license to engage in, they have permission, to sell a thing to people in general.  But they're engaged in this activity over here where thes another set of licensing that they don't have, and they don't have qualifications.  [57:51] The other issue is that they have no duty, a restaurant has no duty to protect the public.  You want to point that out to them.  This is another item you want to bring up to "the attention of," and you'll see this in the letter.  You bring that to the attention of the Risk Manager, the Chief Counsel for the Organization.  They have no duty to protect the public, but yet they're acting in that capacity.  Moreover, they don't just have zero duty to protect the public, they don't even have the capacity to protect the public.  And that language I am telling you right now comes from case law.  Go see the case law.  This is what judges have been saying for 50 years or a 100 years.  You have to have a duty to protect the public.  You have to have the capacity to protect the public.  That means you have to have the funding, the training, the equipment, and you have to be insured really.  The qualifications to engage in that activity.  If I saw a fire in my neighborhood, I couldn't just go over there and start putting it out . . . I mean I probably could but I really shouldn't.  I'm not qualified.  I don't understand all that stuff.  I'm not a fireman, so . . . that's why we have these restrictions.  Even if there was a pandemic, the law is still the same.  It doesn't repeal laws.  See, they have a problem.  You have the Dept of Health which is supposed to police the unlicensed practice of medicine yet they're pushing the unlicensed practice of medicine.  [59:16] We need to follow many, many complaints.  Because here's what happens.  You have an insurance liability for the one who is doing it for the entire business on that property, again, it's like a slip and fall, maybe a little bit worse.  But then you have a liability for your county and your state, probably your city, because they have a liability for pushing this.  They're part of it.  And I don't know what that liability is yet, but we're going to talk about how to address that too.  [59:47]  Okay, so now you have a Civil Liability where you get into the issue of  . . . religious convictions where you cannot be denied services because of a religious convictions.  You can't be denied services because of a disability if you're in a wheelchair, whatever.  So we all know that.  You have your different state laws.  And, of course, they're actionable.  There's a private right of action, which means you can sue under that particular statute, like in California like Peggy is talking about.  It's California Civil Code 51.  We have one here, it's Florida Statute 760, almost word for word.  And you can sue under that.  The way you sue though is that you don't just sue somebody.  You have to document it and then you have to try to work it out.  So you got to send them a letter, and tell them, "Hey guys, you messed up.  I'll give you a chance to fix it, let's work this out."  [100:35]  But you also need to send a letter to the administrative agency that is supposed to oversee this type of violation.  Normally, it'll be the Human Rights Commission, and you'll see my example here in these notes.  So there's a letter here . . . I didn't do a screenshot.  Like in the Sprouts example, we can bring in the state's . . . .  Page 5.  The subject of the letter is "Complaint for Unlawful Discrimination."  If you state your case properly, you're probably going to get the remedy you want without going to court.  They don't want to go to court.  I mean they don't want to go to court any more than you do.  It's expensive.  For them, it's really expensive.  If you go to court by yourself, you might pay like $500 in filing fees over a period of a year.  For those guys, it's literally like $50,000.  And as much as I don't like to, sometimes I win just because of the cost of litigation, and I would really like to win on the merits of the case.  But this will work in our favor, so you present it like this.  Here's my general statement here.  I went and got their own policy.  I copied the pertinent sections.  [102:15]  I printed every single page and put it in a binder.  If you have to do this, let's do this, right?  It was fun.  It was empowering.  I'd go in there with a binder.  The store manager runs over.  We had this conversation.  I said okay, "So you guys have a policy about mask-wearing?  He goes "Yeah."  I said, "Can you show me which page it is?"  It's like he couldn't believe I had . . . you know.  So he goes, "It's not in there."  So I said, "Can I see your updated one?" So he comes back with a piece of paper.  He's waving a piece of paper.  In black and white it says, "All Customers Must Wear a Mask."  I have to take it at face value.  So then I asked him, "This says that.  This is your policy.  This part of your policy says that you have to respect these issues, which are here."  Of course, he didn't respond to that; I didn't want to argue with the guy.  Why not bring a case against them, not for violating your civil rights, I mean we all know you have civil rights and stuff like that.  But why not get an injunction against them for something that they already admit to?  Why not bring a case where there really shouldn't be a dispute once the store sees the case and the case is I am suing you so that you all have to comply with your own policy?  So what are they going to say, "That's not our policy.  It's secret?" If you have a secret policy, that's not a store policy.  It has to be public because you're open to the public.  Just like the vaccine court.  Or the FISA Court.  Those are not courts even though they call them courts.  It's because they're secret.  There's no such thing as a secret court.  So there's no such thing as an unwritten or secret policy when it comes to issues from public business.  So when you sue them for an injunction against violating their own policy that incorporates all the laws they're supposed to follow, it makes it into one single issue which allows you the chance to win on summary judgment.  A Siummary Judgment says to the judge, "Hey Judge, you knliow what?  They've already admitted they have this certain policy, they've already admitted that thy've violated it, so I just want a sumary judgment because there's no controversy here."  

[104:47]  To confirm, John, an Injunction means that they will stop doing this action.  That's what an injunction is.  

[104:52]  Yeah, it enjoins them from breaking their own policy, they've violated their own policy, so the court would order them to comply with their own policy.  And don't ask for money.  I mean you can, but I would recommend not.  I don't think you should.  I just think that you should get Equitable Relief, which is an injuction.  And I think you can do it within 90 days.  We'll see.  I'am about to file one against Sprouts.  Is that the one where you brought your own handbook?  Yeah.  I told them, "Hey, I'll meet you down there on Monday, I want to document eerything."  I thought we were going to get out of there with our groceries.  I thought I was going to get some black cherry juice stuff and other things.  Now we have a perfect case.  We've got all the facts, and the case is basically what you're seeing here.   

[106:22]  You have the Human Rights Commission, or whatever it is in your state.  Send your letter there.  Articulate the thing.  Use my letter.  Use the language.  That is what you do when you send the company the pre-suit medication notice.  The note that says, "Hey, I was just at your store.  You did this thing.  It was wrong I thought.  And I'm sending you this letter to see if you can work this out.  And send it to the Chief Counsel and send it to the store manager.  Then send your report to the Department of Health, and send a letter to the Human Rights Commission, your state agency.  My recommendation on that is that you DON'T let the Chief Counsel of the organization, or the store manager, know that you're complaining to the State, like the Department of Health.  Don't let them know that because I think that it's in your interest that you want them to make a decision quickly.   And if they see that you've sent a letter to a state agency, the attorney might just say, "I"m going to wait and see what happens there," because a lot of them are afraid to make a decision.  So I want them to make a decision as soon as possible and in the background, I'm going to file these complaints where I can these letters, okay?  

BUSINESSES MEASURING OXYGEN LEVELS?  [107:25] The other health issue is that and it has been demonstrated [and you guys can look for this through the internet] you'll see where people have been measuring the oxygen levels and the mask-wearing.  There's a letter back from 2007, that was sent to OSHA, and an enforcement officer was talking about the science behind a particular regulation that I mention here.  This is an OSHA reg that covers the process by which an employer would make an employer or organization would make someone wear a mask on site.  29CFR.1910.134.  Certain precautions that have to be taken.  A physician has to be involved.  The person being told to wear a mask has to give his consent.  Even then you still can't make someone wear a mask.  

[108:17]  Peggy:  They're testing us.  They're seeing that people are compliant.  They're doubling down.  It's like California is one of the test states for the nation, like Hawaii is, New York, and others.  The other thing is they want to see . . . they have all of this written down, too.  They've told us that they're going to use test cases.  That they're going to say who is compliant and who is going to push back and all of that is in writing.  And the beauty of this is even with all of these regulations, and California is the leader in regulations, is you've made the bed.  You've given us all of this.  And your idea of filing the violations with the Health Department is brilliant because they are the very ones who are supposedly giving out the guidelines, and I believe that some of these health officers are going to start back peddling or they're resigning.  We've seen many of the Department of Health Directors resign in California.  I think it was Ohio, Connecticut, Oregon, and Colorado.  They've been falling like dominoes. And Healthy Americans, helps me, how many state and county health officers in your state have resigned or have just been appointed?  Many of these . . . when they realize they're placeholders, they don't want to go to prison.     

[110:00]  These guys are going down.  I just reported every member of my City Council for disaster fraud. 

[110:00]  All of these documents Peggy has at the Healthy American.  These are the tools you're going to use going forward: you're going to use them against vaccination, you're going to use them against contact tracing, you're going to use it against testing, you're going to use it at your workplace.  What about the courts who require you  to wear a mask inside the courtroom?  Understand property rights, privacy rights, irrevocable rights, and places of public accommodation.  

[112:30]  The Chief Judge is the person responsible for the courthouse.  And you want to in advance send a letter to the Chief Judge and let him know that he is accepting liability and responsibility, and that I have a whole list of things that he's going to be liable for.  You just put him on notice.  You don't need his consent at all.  You just tell him.  

[112:55] This is the OSHA regs.  29CFR.1910.134.  OSHA spent decades, since the 1970s, studying the science behind keeping workers safe mostly. And that has to do with wearing equipment that restricts air flow or oxygen. 

[113:10] Immediately when you put a mask on, it violates OSHA Safety Regulation the moment you put it on .  And the longer you keep it on, you increase the chance of you getting bacterial infections, like pleursy Legionairre's Disease and Streptococcus.  You're goint to see a lot of people with welts and infeections on their face.  This in itself is a safety violation.  Imagine if you file a copmlant with the DOH for them to puportedly requiring them to violate healtha nd safety laws and theyre in charge of health and safety, who's above the Department of Health?  More than likely it's going to be your State Attorney Gernal's office, and that's the person who prosecutes people for crimes.  That's the person who would prosecute somebody for dumpring toxic waste or polluting the water, you know, things like that.  So your next step up is the AG's office.  You need to document what's going on and you need to notify the DOH.  I mean all of us on this call could file 10 of these this week.  Just go to DOH, look for "Unlicensed Practice of Medicine," download the form, fill it out . . . .  Mail it in.  Just flood them with it.  

[114:36]  Peggy:  And that's going to go agaisnt Sprouts, the swimming pool manager, local hair salon, your dentist, mechanic, We're trying to get the Dept. of Health to stop breathing down your neck.  

How to Sue Sprouts or Other Businesses.  This is the only way to get businesses to abide by the law, by your civil rights, and maintain some civility in society.  Sad but these companies commit terrible acts.  

LETTERS

Notice of Discrimination. 

To start the preliminary documentation and preliminary notifications to a company, start with these letters.  

Discriminated against?  It can happen to the best of us.  See Item #3 here. 

Okay, when it comes to defending your civil rights, what you're doing is relying on the federal code 1964 U.S. Civil Rights law. 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is federal civil rights legislation that prohibits discrimination in numerous settings including employment, education, voting, and public accommodations.

“SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

See if this advances your understanding, your actions, and your strategy.

Licensing Guide for the State of California.