Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.
March 19, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — The military has imposed widespread coercive policies to reach a goal of 100% vaccinated personnel.
Despite the COVID-19 vaccine being voluntary under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), service members are being subjected to segregation policies designed to coerce them into taking an experimental drug.
The COVID vaccines have not demonstrated efficacy in preventing infection or transmission, nor do these vaccines have long-term safety data.
Unvaccinated: restricted access to public amenities
At Altus Air Force Base in Oklahoma, Col. Matthew A. Leard, recently signed a memorandum, “97 AMW Policies and Directives Regarding Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)” for all personnel with two very different lists of restrictions for those vaccinated and not vaccinated:
Vaccinated Personnel: Paragraph 2 of this policy applies only to those personnel who have received both doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, and at least 5 days have passed since the receipt of the second dose. Paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10 of this policy do not apply to COVID vaccinated personnel, subject to the conditions in paragraph 2.d. All personnel who have not received both doses of the vaccine are subject to paragraphs 3-10 below.
The unvaccinated have restrictions on the following: leave and travel, access to off-base events and establishments including restaurants and bars and access to gathering places on base at chapels and theaters, with requirements to wear masks, test for COVID and participate in contact tracing.
The memorandum specifies that proof of vaccination is required to have access to public amenities:
Vaccinated individuals may be required to provide proof they are vaccinated against COVID-19 in order to avail themselves of these policies for vaccinated personnel. Individuals who decline to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination will not be granted the privileges of paragraphs 2.a and are required to abide by paragraphs 3-10 below.
The creation of two classes of people, the vaccinated and unvaccinated, assumes that the vaccinated have immunity when in fact none of the COVID vaccines have demonstrated efficacy in preventing infection or transmission. The COVID vaccine trials were designed to reduce symptoms.
The Altus Air Force Base policy assumes that the unvaccinated are disease spreaders, without any regard for naturally acquired immunity.
**Photo credit: Shutterstock.com
Mainstream media sources are promoting offensive suggestions by some doctors that people who refuse a vaccine for COVID-19 should be "punished" by the government and by business - effectively coercing them into taking the vaccine.
- One group of doctors writing in 'USA Today' suggested that the government impose special taxes (i.e., fines) on people who refuse the vaccination and that business simply refuse to serve them. [see story below]
- Another doctor writing in an online publication called 'The Conversation' shamelessly suggested that people who refuse a vaccine should be given a psychoactive drug to induce compliance. [see story below]
But, these suggestions are plain political posturing, and have nothing to do with science or with the recent trends of the disease.
And, in case they haven't noticed, we live in a democracy not a medical dictatorship!
Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks policy-makers and business people, at all levels, to pledge to respect the rights of those who, in good conscience, decide not to vaccinate themselves or their children.
People should not have to live in fear of governmental or corporate retribution for refusing a vaccine which is being rushed to market by Big Pharma and their fellow-travelers in NGOs, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
It would be intolerable and immoral for the government or business to coerce someone, and their family, to take a COVID vaccine against their will to avoid a fine, or just so they can do their weekly grocery shopping.
Medical freedom must be respected in principle and also in practice.
So, it is now time that our policy-makers listen to all voices involved in this vital conversation, and start to represent those who will not tolerate being punished for refusing a vaccine.
Simply put, legislatures must begin to act as legislatures again.
Questions must be asked. Hearings and investigations must be held. And, the legislatures of each state and country must return to the business of representing the people who voted for them, assuming their rightful place as the originator of legislation.
We can no longer accept the dictates of executive branches without question, especially now that, statistically speaking, the initial brunt of the COVID crisis has passed.
Neither can we accept the dictates of doctors who seem detached from reality and from science, and who only seem to be attached to the idea of promoting ideas which contribute to the agrandizement of power and control of political interests, and wealth of those who stand to make a lot of money from the sale of a COVID vaccine.
Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks government and business leaders to pledge to respect the rights of those who refuse a COVID vaccine, and not seek to punish them for doing so.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
'Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/doctors-lay-out-plan-to-punish-people-who-refuse-coronavirus-vaccine-there-is-no-alternative
'US professor: ‘Psychoactive pill’ should be covertly administered to ensure lockdown compliance' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-professor-ensure-lockdown-compliance-by-drugging-dissenters-with-psychoactive-pill
Unvaccinated: threats of termination
At U.S. Southern Command in Doral Florida, a veteran who is now a federal officer working for the military as a civilian, told The Defender that his supervisor informed him that the COVID vaccine was required, and his refusal would result in termination.
The veteran’s financial situation compelled him to take the vaccine under these circumstances. He suffered a vaccine reaction, and he is now gathering legal advice relating U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) coercion to take the vaccine.
The veteran was not given information about informed consent or any information on his legal right to refuse.
Unvaccinated: confinement to quarters
An active duty sailor reported to The Defender that his executive officer misinformed the crew that they can sue for any injuries from the vaccine, which is false assurance under the liability protections for all COVID countermeasures in the Public Readiness and Preparedness (PREP) Act of 2020.
The sailor’s superiors set a goal for 100% of the ship to get vaccinated, without information on contraindications or risks of adverse reactions. If the ship reaches the 100% goal, then sailors will no longer be required to wear masks when at sea, adding peer pressure to coerce vaccine acceptance.
According to the sailor, his leaders will prohibit unvaccinated sailors from leaving the ship when pier side, but the vaccinated will retain this privilege to go home at night. He will be confined to the ship for six months. His chain of command questioned him on his reasons for not choosing the vaccine, and required him to sign a counseling form for refusal.
In the military, counseling forms can negatively affect promotion, selection for advanced training and leadership positions, and preferred duty assignments. All of these policies were justified for health and welfare that promote military readiness.
Although the COVID vaccines are voluntary under EUA, these policies are designed to coerce uptake of an experimental drug, without the required discussion of alternatives with established safety and effectiveness.
Evidence is lacking that leadership is taking active measures to protect those who might be contraindicated for the vaccine (including personnel who recently recovered from SARS-CoV2) when sailors report the goal is 100% vaccinated.
These policies are a slippery slope towards Jim Crow Laws applied to vaccine status.
Leaders circumventing EAU requirements
It is clear that the military understands that the COVID vaccine under EUA cannot be mandated and must be voluntary. It is a leadership failure that the military is exaggerating the benefits of the vaccine, while omitting the risks and alternatives.
This pattern of documented policies could be the legal basis for “willful misconduct” that is necessary to seek compensation for a vaccine injury under the PREP Act. Under Doe v. Rumsfeld, EUA vaccines cannot be compulsory in the military without a presidential waiver.
The chain of command is blatantly acting in subterfuge of a non-existent presidential order to compel a vaccine that is not licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. High-ranking officers are using deceit and abuse of power to reach their goal of 100% vaccinated for an “exceeds expectation” on their next evaluation at the risk of medical experimentation of the entire military force.
Under Federal law, no employer, including the U.S Department of Defense, can mandate the COVID vaccine under EUA. The Defender has previously summarized federal EUA law prohibiting mandates as a resource.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.
© March 19, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.