Featured Image

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

March 9, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — The U.S. Air Force Air has created policies intended to restrict the movement of personnel based on their COVID-19 vaccination status — despite the fact that the vaccines are not mandatory, are still in phase 3 clinical trials and are still considered experimental, having been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration under Emergency Use Authorization (EAU).

The Air Force is actively coercing uptake of the vaccines in violation of medical ethics, federal law and, in the case of Vandenberg Air Force Base in Lompoc, Calif., in violation of California state law.

On Jan. 13, Lt. Col. Joseph Rountree, Commander 30th Healthcare Operations Squadron at Vandenberg Air Force Base created a policy to strong-arm uptake of an experimental drug for all personnel without regard for individual contraindications and without providing information on alternatives, as required by the Emergency Use Authorization.

Rountree, who is not a doctor, may not be aware that the clinical trials were designed to measure symptom mitigation, and neither Pfizer-BioNTech’s nor Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine have demonstrated efficacy to prevent infection or transmission.

In a memo obtained by The Defender, Rountree misinforms on the potential protective benefits of the vaccine and omits the risks of adverse reactions:

While the vaccine is not currently mandated, vaccine research reports that it produces a highly effective immune response in those who receive it. The vaccine provides robust protection, and cannot be forgotten or removed like masks and sanitizers; therefore is more powerful than other precautions.


In an unprecedented policy that undermines the right of refusal for an EUA drug, Rountree states that he will not approve travel outside the state of California for personnel who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine, thereby restricting the freedom of movement of healthy people:

The travel waiver request form has been modified to include information about your COVID-19 vaccination status (see attached). I will place significant weight on your vaccination status when reviewing travel requests. Leisure travel outside of the state of California is very likely to be disapproved if you have not been vaccinated.

Rountree also established a new form and counseling session with the chain of command for personnel to justify why they choose to exercise their rights to opt-out of what amounts to participating in a phase 3 clinical trial of an experimental drug, thus creating a culture of coercion in violation of medical ethics:

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine
  Show Petition Text
103103 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
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.

                                                                                                                      **Photo credit:

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.


'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' -

  Hide Petition Text

BLUF, if people are not vaccinated I will likely NOT approve travel outside of CA. I will listen to exceptions on a case-by-case basis, so please encourage our people to set up a meeting (flight leadership, them, me and MSgt Hill) to discuss if there is a compelling reason they should stay unvaccinated but need to travel.

COVID vaccine policy — unlawful coercion?

On Feb. 21, Col. Anthony Mastalir, Commander of Vandenberg AFB in California  issued Public Health Directive #8 applying to all personnel at Vandenberg and authorizing  leave and pass privileges only to personnel who choose to take a COVID-19 vaccine:

We continue to employ a rigorous medical and legal review process to ensure base policies remain relevant and lawful. Accordingly, some restrictions need not apply to those individuals who have chosen to receive the vaccine, Exceptions for fully vaccinated individuals identified in this directive have been found to be medically permissible, legally sufficient and consistent with the current directives of higher authorities. For the purposes of this directive, an individual is deemed fully vaccinated two weeks after completing an FDA-approved vaccine treatment (including vaccines authorized for emergency use). For the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine, this means two shots plus two weeks (2+2).

The local area for Vandenberg AFB is defined as San Luis Obispo County and Santa Barbara County. However, effective immediately, fully vaccinated individuals are exempt from this local area definition and, therefore, may resume leave and pass processes consistent with unit policies and AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program.

Mastalir’s policy potentially violates federal law protections in 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 authorization for medical products for use in emergencies. For an unapproved product the statute (section 564(e)(1)(A)(iii)) requires that individuals are informed “that they have the option to accept or refuse the EUA product and of any consequences of refusing administration of the product; and of any available alternatives to the product and of the risks and benefits of available alternatives.”

Mastalir’s policy also possibly violates California Health & Safety Code § 24172 which is the state’s experimental subject’s bill of rights, with a list of rights including: “Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to a medical experiment without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.”

Clearly, Mastalir’s policy has overstepped into coercion, most likely due to the lack of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) to supervise investigational trials of drugs with human subjects, with contact information for the IRB given to participants. Lack of IRB oversight is a violation of federal law 21CFR 50.23.

Mastalir’s policy does not even acknowledge that taking the vaccine is voluntary participation in a phase 3 clinical trial of the COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 vaccine trials didn’t prove prevention

The COVID-19 vaccines do not have data demonstrating efficacy in preventing infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech clinical trials were designed to study symptom reduction.

Table 23 on page 37 of the Moderna clinical trial compares the symptom differences of fever, headache, fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, nausea/vomiting and chills between the vaccine group and placebo group after each dose in the 18 – 64 age group with a significant greater symptom percentage in the vaccine group:

This Moderna data does not demonstrate a reduction of symptoms in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group. “Fully vaccinated” results in more COVID symptoms in 81.9% of subjects.


Table 19 on page 39 of the Pfizer-BioNTech clinical trial, compares the symptom differences of pain, fatigue, pyrexia, chills, myalgia, arthralgia, headache, diarrhea, and nausea between the vaccine group and placebo group after the second dose in the 16 years and older age group with a significant greater symptom percentage in the vaccine group.

If COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection, do not prevent transmission and do not decrease symptoms, then what is the justification for coercing service members to take this drug?


Our military personnel deserve evidence-based medicine that also honors medical ethics. Evidence and ethics are currently being ambushed by compliant commanders.

© March 8, 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.


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.