The March to Mandatory Vaccination and Global Lockdown Pushes Forward

Totalitarian Tiptoe inches forward, with the push for mandatory vaccination leading the charge

Push for mandatory vaccination, universal immunization passports and coming lockdown this fall/winter are at the forefront of the ongoing NWO march to tyranny, and they’re now openly pushing their totalitarian agenda for all to see.

A week ago, on August 21, Virginia’s health commissioner publicly announced his plan to mandate a coronavirus vaccination for all state residents.

The state’s top health official “told 8News on Friday that he plans to mandate coronavirus vaccinations for Virginians once one is made available to the public.”

Virginia state law gives the Commissioner of Health the authority to mandate immediate immunizations during a public health crisis if a vaccine is available. Health officials say an immunization could be released as early as 2021.

“Dr Norman Oliver, who heads up the state’s department of health, said he would require all Virginians to get the jab so long as he remains health commissioner when a vaccine is available,” RT added.

“[Covid-19] is killing people now, we don’t have a treatment for it and if we develop a vaccine that can prevent it from spreading in the community, we will save hundreds and hundreds of lives,” Oliver said.

Never mind that deaths attributed to ‘Covid19’ have been on a steady declining trend since the end of April, with only a brief small spike at the end of last month, and the downward trend continuing to this day.

(source)

Never mind that the CDC’s own data estimates the case fatality rate to be between just 0.2-0.4%, no worse than a sever flu season, and for some reason no influenza epidemic ever caused such a coordinated fervor for all the measures being touted as necessary to stop this particular so-called virus, including compulsorily vaccination.

It is worth noting that earlier this month yet another attorney has joined the growing number of lawyers advocating the ‘legality’ of compulsory vaccination.

Does the state have the right to force vaccination upon the population, media outlets around the world have been asking recently?

“The short answer is yes, according to Dov Fox, a law professor and the director of the Center for Health Law Policy and Bioethics at the University of San Diego.”

“States can compel vaccinations in more or less intrusive ways,” he said in an interview. “They can limit access to schools or services or jobs if people don’t get vaccinated. They could force them to pay a fine or even lock them up in jail.”

While the US has not yet attempted to jail those who refuse such mandated vaccines, Fox noted that some countries “like France have adopted the aggressive tactic,” so it is certainly not entirely off the table.

The legal precedent dates back to 1905. In a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the court ruled Massachusetts had the authority to fine people who refused vaccinations for smallpox.

And as I have mentioned in previous posts, the court cited the state’s ‘right’ to conscript members of the populace into military service as a pretext for the ruling. Keep this in mind, as it will soon become evident that the notion the state has the right to compel you to fight, kill and die in its wars is at the heart of the argument for mandatory vaccines.

More info on this in James Corbett’s info-packed video on the subject from last month:

With such legal precedents already set, and the agenda ready to go, it isn’t just US officials announcing plans for mandatory vaccination, but other countries as well, with Australia at the forefront of this inoculation campaign.

The Australia Prime Minister announced on the 19th, just two days before the Virginia health commissioner’s similar announcement, that he “expected” all Australians to face mandatory vaccination.

“Australians are likely to face mandatory coronavirus vaccinations if Prime Minister Scott Morrison gets his wish,” ABC News Australia reported.

But then, in what seems to be a recurring theme lately (as we will see shortly), he walked back his inflammatory comments just a bit in an apparent attempt to appease the ‘anti-vax’ crowd.

“With governments around the world anticipating resistance to compulsory inoculation from anti-vaxx groups and a sceptical public, Scott Morrison said on Wednesday morning in Sydney the aim was to get 95% of the population to have the jab and that he was “expecting” that it would be compulsory except on medical grounds,” The Guardian reported.

“I would expect it to be as mandatory as you can possibly make,” Morrison said in a radio interview. “We’re talking about a pandemic that has destroyed the global economy and taken the lives of hundreds of thousands all around the world, and over 430 Australians. So, you know, we need the most extensive and comprehensive response to this to get Australia back to normal.”

So forcing vaccination on the entire population to stop a virus that has killed just 430 Australians! Sounds a little excessive and overzealous to me, but this is the reasoning driving these agendas.

As The Guardian noted:

...by the afternoon Morrison had changed his language, telling 2GB radio he did not mean it would be compulsory, but would be “encouraged”.

Right, because he didn’t intend his use of the word “mandatory” to mean “compulsory”...

“We can’t hold someone down and make them take it,” the prime minister said.

And while many states may ultimately decide they don’t have the right to hold people down and force the injections into them, there is another much more efficient way to make vaccination effectively mandatory, which would also protect the state from the legal ramifications and public blowback of directly imposing such a mandate on the population via executive order or legislative action.

A highly controversial USA Today op-ed published at the beginning of the month also forcefully pushed the idea that vaccine mandates are a patriotic societal necessity, but then in similar fashion to the Australian PM’s quick change in official stance, the offensive headline was modified slightly to appear a little less ‘un-American’.

As an article recently published by Global Research explained: “The USA Today article, published August 6, is titled ‘Defeat COVID-19 by requiring vaccination for all. It’s not un-American, it’s patriotic.’”

Its original subhead (see screenshot below) read, “Make vaccines free, don’t allow religious or personal objections, and punish those who won’t be vaccinated. They are threatening the lives of others.” It has since been changed to “Make vaccines free, don’t allow religious or personal objections, and create disincentives for those who refuse vaccines shown to be safe and effective.”

The article begins with the authors stating that:

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

There’s no getting around the intentions of this propaganda piece, convincing all Americans that “getting vaccinated is going to be our patriotic duty.” Kinda like how Trump has turned wearing masks into a supposedly highly ‘patriotic’ act, despite his own disagreements with such mandates for many weeks prior to his shift in official public stance.

It might seem absolutely draconian and un-American, but the authors want you to know that, “there is no alternative.”

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

“How can government and society ensure compliance with protective vaccines?” the authors ask.

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

At least the authors acknowledge the seeming anti-American, tyrannical nature of their admittedly draconian proposition, but a more important cornerstone to the American tradition than freedom, they argue, “is that we come together when it’s necessary.” And who defines ‘when it’s necessary’? The government and corporate sellout media of course!

We acknowledge that the refusal to obey rules one considers unjust is an American tradition. But another cornerstone of the American tradition is that we come together when it’s necessary. The best example of this was during the two world wars. Everyone contributed, no one was allowed to opt out merely because it conflicted with a sense of autonomy, and draft dodgers who refused to serve were subject to penalties.

And there’s that cornerstone of their argument, the idea that being forced to fight, kill and die in wars that are not even being fought in self defense, and which one neither supports nor agrees with, is both fundamentally ‘American’ and somehow morally upright. The reality is that conscription and the penalizing of those who refuse to participate in war is both morally bankrupt and the very essence of human slavery.

But it doesn’t stop there, with the authors going so far as to advocate for the ‘immunity passports’/‘digital vaccine certificates’ proposed by Bill Gates and others months ago.

As Claire Chretien writes in the Global Research piece:

They then outlined how a “registry of immunization will be needed with names entered after immunization is completed.” People who receive the vaccine should be issued “certification cards” with expiration dates (“the durability of protection by different vaccines may vary and may require periodic booster immunizations”).

This is exactly what Dr. Fauci, speaking all the way back in April, said would likely soon be necessary.

“Chief coronavirus task force medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said Friday that Americans may soon have to carry a certificate of immunity to the coronavirus,” the Daily Caller reported at that time. When asked about such a potential future, he responded that:

”...this is something that’s being discussed. I think it might actually have some merit under certain circumstances.”

Bill Gates has in a similar vein repeatedly floated this idea as part of his proposed technocratic future, stating on one occasion around the same time as Fauci’s April comments, that there would soon come a time when everyone in the world would need to carry a vaccine certificate in order to be able to travel.

Of course the doctors, pundits and ‘experts’ such as these are in fact advocating for a form of human slavery, just as proponents of the draft support a form of human slavery, and it gets even worse.

One doctor in Australia has gone off the rails in his attacks on so-called ‘anti-vaxxers’ and virulent push for mandatory vaccination.

“To achieve ‘herd immunity’ and completely eradicate the transmission of COVID-19,” Zac Turner writes, “Australia would need about 80 to 95 per cent of its population vaccinated.”

And a key element to achieving this is to convince everyone to get vaccinated – even those people who are the curse of the scientific community, anti-vaxxers. That means 20 million Australians is the vaccination target.

And that’s a tall order to fill. But for proponents, all it will take is a little ingenuity to get around those pesky ‘anti-vaxxers’, along with adoption of the previously mentioned “vaccination passport.”

The government should consider updating the current “yellow fever vaccination passport” issued to Australians who receive vaccinations before visiting high risk countries. These could easily be turned into electronic vaccine cards and offered to each Australian.

Apparently, “The next biggest threat to the virus is those who refuse to be vaccinated against COVID-19.” I must assume this is some sort of typo, as it seems that it is the virus we are fighting to eradicate, not the things which threaten the virus. Clearly, it is people who don’t want to be forced to receive an injection against their will being painted as the “threat” to society. “In America, a CNN poll showed one-third of Americans would not get the vaccine even if it was readily available and affordable,” he writes.

And here is where the doctor totally goes off the deep end...

The problem is a bunch of clowns with degrees from the “University of Believing Everything They Read Off the Internet” are espousing misinformation and lies that could seriously derail our country’s return back to normal.

Because now, any vaccine facts that would cause ‘vaccine hesitancy’ among the population is considered “misinformation and lies.” I know Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and thousands of families whose children have been adversely affected by dangerous vaccines would take issue with this stance; but then again these are the very type of “anti-vaxxers” who have become “the curse of the scientific community” in Dr. Turner’s eyes, because any science that challenges the agenda must be discounted by every possible means, usually by attacking the messengers as crazy kooks while ignoring the fact-based messages.

And how do we enforce such a proposed mandate on the population? By having businesses act as the NWO police enforcers, of course, banning entry to anyone who doesn’t provide their proof of vaccination like a good little slave.

I believe a person who refuses to be vaccinated should not be allowed to travel interstate or overseas, nor be allowed to travel on public transport without a face mask. And when it comes to the private sector, businesses could refuse these anti-vaxxers from visiting their retail outlets, gyms, movie cinemas, restaurants, bars or nightclubs.
As a precedence, state governments have previously banned children from attending childcare if they are not vaccinated. Similar restrictions could be placed on Australians who refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccination.

Of course the doctor left the juicy facts regarding his own personal vaccine background, which reveals what appears to be a massive conflict of interest on the author’s part, for the very end of his article.

Between 2002 and 2003 I helped vaccinate the local populations from mumps, measles, rubella, polio, and tetanus. First-hand I saw a community struggling to achieve herd immunity. It was this training and experience that has moulded my strong passion for vaccinations, as I have seen the devastation when herd immunity does not exist.

Then, get this: “A few years later in 2007,” Zac Turner “worked in the AstraZeneca malaria research lab in Brisbane where we researched the development of medication and treatments to eradicate malaria from the world.

“AstraZeneca may sound familiar as they are developing the COVID-19 vaccine that Prime Minister Scott Morrison settled in a deal to make sure every Australian has a vaccine.”

But let’s just go ahead and ignore that little conflict of interest there, revealing a Big Pharma corporation’s apparent use of its own asset(s) to push mandatory vaccination in the media, on the very population of the country which it has just won a deal to supply the vaccine to. How many of the other doctors pushing mandatory vaccines have ties to the pharmaceuticals manufacturing these vaccines?

Nonetheless, Turner ends the ‘anti-vaxxer’ hit piece with a bang.

“Choices have consequences and an anti-vaxxer’s nonsensical stance should see their lives limited to help protect the rest of the community.

”No longer can we nurse the conspiracy theories of a few, and put us all at risk.”

Instead, we must blindly follow the tyrannical edicts of the power-hungry few.

The National Geographic has recently joined the fray, giving us all a glimpse into our near Covid1984 future.

You walk toward the arena, ready for a big game, tickets in hand. But what you see is a long line wrapping around the corner of the building and a bottleneck at the entrance as people search their pockets and purses for a small piece of paper. To be cleared to enter, you’ll also need that document—proof that you’ve received a COVID-19 vaccination.

There it is again, reference to the coming vaccination certificate or immunity passport.

“This is the future as some experts see it: a world in which you’ll need to show you’ve been inoculated against the novel coronavirus to attend a sports game, get a manicure, go to work, or hop on a train.”

“We’re not going to get to the point where the vaccine police break down your door to vaccinate you,” says Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at New York University’s School of Medicine. But he and several other health policy experts envision vaccine mandates could be instituted and enforced by local governments or employers—similar to the current vaccine requirements for school-age children, military personnel, and hospital workers.

As I’ve been saying all along, this will be enforced at the local level by the very same businesses now enforcing the unconstitutional mask mandates.

The Push for Lockdown

Mandatory vaccination isn’t the only measure being pushed as a part of the Covid1984 agenda rollout, and for months the ‘experts’ have been warning us that this winter is going to be the darkest winter ever, with a massive resurgence in coronavirus, necessitating a wide scale lockdown.

The mainstream media is continuing to push this narrative, with the headline of a Bloomberg article published in mid-August suggesting that forced isolation may be the only way to stop the spread of the so-called virus.

Flare-ups from Australia to Japan show the world hasn’t learned an early lesson from the coronavirus crisis: to stop the spread, those with mild or symptom-free coronavirus infections must be forced to isolate, both from their communities and family.

This is in direct contradiction to the WHO’s assessment that asymptomatic carriers are generally non-contagious.

But pushing this fallacy is nonetheless crucial in their rollout of this facet of the Orwellian agenda.

The failure to effectively manage contagious people with mild or no symptoms is a driving factor behind some of the world’s worst resurgences. But lessons from Italy, South Korea and others that have successfully contained large-scale outbreaks show that there’s a tried-and-tested approach to cutting off transmission: move them out of their homes into centralized facilities while they get over their infections, which usually doesn’t require longer than a few weeks.

Yes, they are openly advocating for the forced removal of people from their homes into quarantines at government facilities. Because, freedom is unsafe, you see...

“A laissez-faire approach naively trusting everyone to be responsible has been shown to be ineffective, as there will always be a proportion who will breach the terms of the isolation,” said Jeremy Lim, adjunct professor at the National University of Singapore’s Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health.

New Zealand has already enacted this totalitarian medical tyranny.

But other countries facing sustained spread like Australia and the U.S. are not broadly enacting the policy despite its proven track record. Their unwillingness -- or inability -- to do so underscores the challenges faced by liberal democracies whose populations are less likely to tolerate measures that require individual sacrifice for the greater good.

Again, freedom is the ‘problem’, and the tyrannical agenda is the ‘solution’.

Beyond household spread, the strategy is necessitated by a facet of human nature that’s been seen time and again across countries and cultures: left to their own devices, some people just won’t follow the rules.

Australia has also been at the forefront of such a lockdown, where the fines for noncompliance continues to rise in hopes of forcing widespread compliance.

And if you think this unconstitutional and could ‘never happen here’ in America, think again; for a US court just ruled that Connecticut’s governor and public health commissioner have the ‘legal’ authority to force residents into just such lockdowns as those now being proposed.

In a case that invites uncomfortable comparisons to the ongoing pandemic, a court ruled Friday that Connecticut’s governor and public health commissioner have broad authority to force residents into involuntary medical quarantines — even if the residents have had no conclusive exposure to a contagion and show no symptoms of infection.

Yes, this ruling appears to cover the entire population, by stating that the authority extends even to those who have no exposure and show no symptoms.

The march to tyranny continues. The totalitarian tiptoe inches forward. They have told us their plans, and are enacting the Covid1984 agenda slowly, one step at a time, dutifully programming the masses to accept the next steps along the way. It is up to we the people to stop it, because indeed, nothing else will.