Featured Image

July 29, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Less than a week after the French Senate adopted the law that will make the COVID vaccine mandatory for the healthcare professions as of September 15, together with a “sanitary pass” for all citizens aged 12 and over, the media run by France’s high chamber of Parliament published a story quoting senators who were angry at the way the debate took place. “We had the impression we were law-making with a gun to our heads,” said Senator Pierre Ouzoulias, of the communist group.

The communist group? Yes, it is partly the left that is standing up to President Macron’s tyrannical decisions forcing people to get the experimental injection — ostensibly for the health professions, and de facto for the rest of the population who will need to exhibit a less than 48 hours old proof of COVID negativity for such everyday things as traveling by long-distance train, enjoying a drink at a bar or restaurant terrace, going to the library or any cultural or leisure venue, indoors or outdoors, where more than 49 people congregate. Even non-urgent healthcare will be subject to the sanitary pass, as well as visiting family in hospital or in a home for the elderly.

To date, a number of representatives from the whole political spectrum have condemned the law pushed through Parliament at breakneck speed, with Macron’s “LREM” (La République en Marche” party) and the “Républicains” very limp “liberal conservative” party offering most support to the sanitary dictatorship.

Opposition to the measures is manifold, as recent demonstrations have shown: The hundreds of thousands who took to the streets in France last Saturday were truly from all quarters of society, and in this fight for freedom against powers that oppose the people, no-one is paying very much attention to the flag waved by those who resist, as long as they truly resist.

It is remarkable that “PublicSénat,” a media entirely owned and run by the French Senate, should have given a lot of space to Senators of various convictions under the title: “Sanitary pass: the senators criticize a text adopted ‘with a gun to their heads.’” “Part of the Senators are still furious at the way they worked on this bill,” wrote journalist Elodie Hervé.

This fact alone should lead the Constitutional Court, which is at present examining the law and has until August 5 to give its response as to its compliance with the French Constitution, to raise doubts about the extraordinary limits the text aims to put on individual freedoms.

It is not the first time that French senators have angrily complained about the way the executive has pushed its reforms through Parliament. Ouzoulias noted with irony: “The simplest thing would be for the president to convene Parliament to address both chambers at the same time and ask them to vote on his text.”

Over the last years, for instance, amendments introduced and adopted by the National Assembly or by the Senate have been overturned within hours by the simple expedient used by the government of presenting them again until it obtained a negative vote. With over half the members of the National Assembly and a good proportion of the senators often away for various reasons, including the COVID crisis, it’s just a question of waiting until representatives favorable to Macron and his government have the majority.

The sanitary draft law introduced by the government on July 19, just seven days after Macron announced the new measures to “contain” COVID-19 on French television, was rushed through the legislative process in six days, and would have been adopted even sooner if the National Assembly had not taken two days to examine the thousand amendments prepared in record time.

“PublicSénat” commented: “However, on the parliamentary side, this way of rushing the debates does not pass muster. ‘It’s complicated to work under these conditions,’ Marie Mercier of the Les Républicains group admitted. ‘I had the feeling that the debates were going the wrong way, that we were only talking about freedom and that we forgot to talk about health.’”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Fire Fauci and investigate him now!
  Show Petition Text
65652 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 70000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.


It seems that Dr. Anthony Fauci's role in the NIH's funding of so-called "gain-of-function" research may be catching up with him.

In the last couple of days, both U.S. Senator Rand Paul and Fox's Tucker Carlson have laid into Fauci for his alleged promotion of this dangerous research which develops bat-based coronaviruses into more potent variants, capable of infecting humans.

Dr. Fauci denied funding this research.

But, Senator Paul noted that a resident virologist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Dr. Shi Zheng-li and Dr. Ralph Baric, an American virologist funded by Fauci's department in the NIH, "collaborated on gain-of-function research where they enhanced the SARS virus to infect human airway cells and they did it by merging a new spy protein on it. That is gain-of-function. That was joint research between the Wuhan Institute and Dr. Baric. You [Dr. Fauci] can’t deny it."

And, later, Fox News host Tucker Carlson picked up on the discrepancy, noting Fauci’s involvement in the creation and promotion of public health directives on account of COVID-19 while also being allegedly tied to the origin of the virus and its spread throughout the world.

So, the evidence - both in testimony and in the court of public opinion - continues to mount.

Could we ask you to consider SIGNING and SHARING this important petition, which calls for Dr. Fauci to be fired and investigated for any role he played in promoting and funding the dangerous research which may have cost the world dearly in lives and jobs lost.


When concerned scientists warned the US government of the great danger of creating superviruses in the lab, one man publicly defended the risky experiments: that man was the influential head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), none other than "Mr. Science" himself: Dr. Anthony Fauci.

In 2014, the same year the US government called for a moratorium on this insanely dangerous research, Dr. Fauci's NIAID began funding a program to study the transmission of bat coronaviruses to humans.

Not only did his funding go to develop the technology for making bat coronaviruses spread more easily to humans, but much of it went to the lab located in the exact location where the Covid pandemic eventually emerged: Wuhan, China.

Like every person, Dr. Fauci deserves to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

But the evidence is so overwhelming that Fauci gambled with a supervirus and lost (the whole world lost), that, at a minimum, he needs to be fired from his position of public trust and must be investigated for possible violations of US law which mandated a moratorium on this extremely dangerous practice of creating superviruses in the lab.

However Dr. Fauci, far from being held responsible for his dangerous gamble, has been promoted to the point where, currently, he is the highest paid employee in the US Government.

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition if you agree that Dr. Anthony Fauci should instead be immediately fired and investigated for his role in causing the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Just like the Wall Street moguls, whose financial negligence precipitated the financial crisis of 2008, received massive bailout bonuses, Dr. Anthony Fauci recklessly pushed for the research that probably caused the deadly pandemic. And now, he, too, has been rewarded with money and power.

As has been carefully and meticulously documented by Steve Hilton of Fox News, the probable origins of the coronavirus point to Dr. Anthony Fauci.  

Dr. Fauci was one of the greatest proponents of developing superviruses in labs.

Dr. Fauci was responsible for the funding of much of the research through the NIAID.

And, it appears that Dr. Fauci funneled taxpayer funds through an intermediary to allow the research to continue in the unsafe Wuhan Institute of Virology, even after the US government banned the funding of this dangerous research.

Until a thorough investigation into his role of the origins of the current pandemic has taken place, Dr. Fauci should not be in a position of public trust.

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition to demand that Dr. Fauci be fired immediately and investigated fully for his role in the creation of Covid-19 and the ensuing pandemic.

P.S. It should be noted that Dr. Fauci not only has proven to be catastrophic for public health with his advocacy of dangerous research, but he has also been a disastrous public health advisor, advocating measures that have negatively impacted every aspect of our lives, from the economy to our most fundamental liberties.

P.P.S. Dr. Anthony Fauci, recently stated that he is delighted to be pushing Joe Biden's return to US taxpayer funding of abortions abroad. So, evidently, not only does Dr. Fauci have problems with public health, public safety, and economics, but also with basic human rights and embryology.


**Photo Credit: Official White House Photo by Tia Dufour

  Hide Petition Text

It’s an interesting point. The protection of freedom is certainly paramount, but in the case of the COVID vaccine, it is also a fundamental necessity to underscore the safety of the jab. While to date one half of the French population is “fully vaccinated,” the large number of people who do not want to get the Spike injection under any condition are mostly those who do not trust it to be safe — and many of these so-called “skeptics” and “conspiracy theorists” are precisely those who are in the front rows as far as witnessing those adverse effects are developing: health workers.

The health bill debate has shown the deep “contempt” of the French executive — Macron, and also his government led by Jean Castex — for the legislative powers, and their “total lack of interest in their function,” noted “PublicSénat.”

It said: “For the past four years, few texts have been adopted without accelerated procedure, with the notable exception of the bioethics bill. ‘Macron’s idea is to say that to be strong, you have to pass [things] quickly,’ added Pierre Ouzoulias. ‘In his eyes, parliamentarians are useless, especially in the Senate where we are seen as archaic, and therefore as uninteresting.’ Ministers followed one another, discussions were not possible and it was necessary to go quickly, summarized the communist senator. ‘It was like a “bed of justice” (after the habit of French monarchs, since Louis XV, of receiving parliamentarians for the first time in a deep, comfortable armchair with cushions). Macron makes decisions alone and we have to follow. This is not parliamentary work: We would have needed a month to study the issues of this text that affect fundamental freedoms. Here, we have the impression of law-making with a gun to our heads. If we did not vote in favor of this text, the government would have accused us of killing the French.’”

Sylviane Noël, of “Les Républicains,” called the whole process “simply staggering.” “For example, we obtained the text amended by the National Assembly on Friday morning, and we had to hand in our amendments by 8:30 p.m. on the same day.”

The Senate then had to hold hours-long sessions so that the government’s objective of adopting the text by the Sunday, less than 48 hours later, could be achieved. Speaking of “endless hours of debate,” Noël complained of having had the feeling of “not having a choice.” “This is not the first time the government has done this to us, we are getting used to it. But this time, I had the feeling of being in police custody — a police custody that goes on until you confess a crime. Here, it was a question of going on until we gave in on this bill.”

The Constitutional Court has until August 5 to examine the law: longer than the National Assembly and the Senat combined. This alone shows the aberration of the method used by the government to push its bill down the throats of the elected representatives of the French people. Already, the government’s spokesman Gabriel Attal has announced that the sanitary pass will probably enter into force on August 9 (and at the end of September for 12–17-year-olds), not even contemplating that the Constitutional judges might reject the bill — although hopes that this will happen are slim.

“I am confident that it will put a stop to this law that infringes on our fundamental freedoms,” commented Sylviane Noël. But it was “PublicSénat” that noted: “Here again, the referral was not done correctly. Socialist Patrick Kanner speaks of ‘deplorable’ debates where the appeal to the Constitutional Council has, again, been drafted precipitously, in one night.”

Things are now very clear: the only reason that the Parliament was convened to vote on the tyrannical bill was to give it an appearance of political consensus; the government would only take “yes” for an answer.

Featured Image

Jeanne Smits has worked as a journalist in France since 1987 after obtaining a Master of Arts in Law. She formerly directed the French daily Présent and was editor-in-chief of an all-internet French-speaking news site called She writes regularly for a number of Catholic journals (Monde & vie, L’Homme nouveau, Reconquête…) and runs a personal pro-life blog. In addition, she is often invited to radio and TV shows on alternative media. She is vice-president of the Christian and French defense association “AGRIF.” She is the French translator of The Dictator Pope by Henry Sire and Christus Vincit by Bishop Schneider, and recently contributed to the Bref examen critique de la communion dans la main about Communion in the hand. She is married and has three children, and lives near Paris.


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.