Opinion
Featured Image
Pro-freedom protestors on July 17, 2021 in Paris, France.Kiran Ridley / Getty Images

 PARIS, France (LifeSiteNews) — France has been under the new, segregationist, regime of the “sanitary pass” that has imposed ever-widening conditions for access to many ordinary social activities since the beginning of August.  

While the sanitary pass does not function as a “vaccine pass” per se – not only the “vaccinated” but also those “unvaccinated” who have recently recovered from COVID or who can present a recent negative test can obtain it – it is becoming increasingly clear that its only purpose is to push people to get the shot. What the sanitary pass cannot do is to prevent contagion and infection: it is incapable of stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2, which was the primary motive put forward by the authorities to justify its implementation. 

This is so clear, in fact, that even official personalities are admitting it, the most spectacular confession having come from Jean-François Delfraissy, head of the National Scientific Council that “guides” the French government’s decisions on restrictions supposedly intended to “curb the pandemic” and avoid infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. 

Delfraissy was being interviewed by the French Senate on December 8th when Senator Catherine Deroche (LR “Les Républicains,” center-right) asked him, the man who has been justifying new COVID restrictions ever since the first lockdown in March 2020, about the usefulness of the sanitary pass. 

Here is his somewhat muddled answer, in full: 

“The pass has played a major role—and, I think, still doesin pushing for vaccination. That’s why we recommended it. And also for the third one. And so, we need it a little bit, to some extent, for the third dose, since the vaccination is underway, but, all in all, we haven’t finished the job on the third dose yet. 

“Does the pass really protect? Well, you’ve given the answer; the answer is ‘no.’ There are limits because you can be vaccinated and still carry the virus. So, it has its limits. Is it time to change the pass, etc.? Probably, [but] this is not the time to change the rules. We’re in the middle of the fifth wave; we have to build on what has been… and whose limits we can see, and then we’ll discuss it all again, afterwards.” 

Earlier in his introductory statement, Delfraissy said that the “vaccinated” should be aware that quite soon after the second shot and perhaps after the third shot, or “booster” as it is now officially called, they can transmit the virus. Without mentioning that the “vaccinated” can and do have severe COVID and even die, he did insist that they should take advantage of the fact that for them (and not for the unvaccinated) antigen testing is free, and that they should be tested regularly, in particular when planning to meet the more vulnerable. 

In other words, the “vaccine” does not provide immunity from COVID, and the sanitary pass that was touted as a protection of the population against the disease is anything but. Otherwise, the “vaccinated” would not be exempt from obtaining a negative test in order to join social events, practice sports, go to restaurants and cafés, or use fast trains. 

The unvaccinated, on the contrary, must show a negative test for these venues. Its validity has now been reduced from 72 to 24 hours, making ordinary life uncomfortable, difficult, and sometimes impossible for the 6 million or so “unvaccinated” eligible citizens in France that the authorities admit to. 

It is hard to imagine a more convincing argument against the sanitary pass – if one places oneself in the logic of the government, that is! – especially since Professor Delfraissy was careful to add that the pass must be kept to push more people into getting the “vaccine” and the third “booster shot.” He even stated that he was not able to assert that a “fourth” dose would not be required sooner or later. He said he was satisfied by the government’s decision to allow people to get the third dose five months, instead of six months, after the second. Some are already suggesting that the third dose should be given within three or four months after the second. 

As for the sanitary pass, it automatically expires for the “vaccinated” seven months after the second dose as of December 15 for those older than 65; it is valid for the rest of the population over 12 years of age until January 15. Once again, the pass is being used, not as an incentive, but as a threat with which citizens are told they will not be able to live normally and have ordinary freedoms without the third dose of  “genomic vaccine.” 

On July 19th, the French Council of State, the highest administrative court, issued advice regarding the planned sanitary pass requirement that had just been announced by President Emmanuel Macron. It said: “The application of the sanitary pass to each of the activities for which it is being considered must be justified by the specific interest of the measure in limiting the spread of the epidemic, in view of the criteria mentioned earlier, and not by an objective which would consist of encouraging the persons concerned to get themselves vaccinated.” 

Obviously, this is quite contrary to the decisions made by the political and administrative authorities and the unelected “Scientific Council” that is ruling France beyond any kind of control. But the “opinion” of the Council of State is unfortunately not binding. 

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Appeal to Catholic Leaders to reject abortion-tainted COVID vaccines and mandates!
  Show Petition Text
12112 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 12500!
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.

As governments across the globe seek to mandate abortion-tainted Covid-19 “vaccines” on millions of people against their will, medical autonomy continues to diminish worldwide, setting a dangerous precedent for future generations. 

In response, during this Season of Advent, we have an important petition sponsored by Deacon Nick Donnelly of England, which makes the case that reception of the COVID vaccines currently available in the Western World is “morally illicit” for virtually all, if not every individual, in ordinary circumstances. 

The Bethlehem Declaration” has already been initially endorsed by four Catholic prelates, including Bishops Marian Eleganti, Rene Henry Gracida, Athanasius Schneider, and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, along with ten priests and many scholars, activists and journalists from the United States, Europe, and Australia.

It also provides a compelling presentation, rich with hyperlinked resources documenting that not only are these injections morally illicit, but ineffective, unsafe, and unnecessary.  

Calling mandates for reception of these chemicals “acts of violence” and “criminal,” the document also encourages those facing these difficult situations to exercise the virtue of prudence to the best of their ability while providing plenty of information to assist them in doing so. 

Deacon Donnelly said this manifesto received its name since the Church is presently contemplating the “baby Jesus who manifests the sanctity of life of all babies, created in the image and likeness of God.”  

“Bethlehem is also associated with the massacre of the Holy Innocents by King Herod,” he said. “This petition gives us the opportunity to protest on behalf of these silenced victims of the pharmaceutical industry” who have been exploited and used for the development and testing of COVID-19 vaccines. 

Another signatory, child advocate Elizabeth Yore, called the Bethlehem Declaration “an outstanding document” which serves as “the definitive response to the globalist tyrannical health Madness.”  Encouraging everyone to read it, she said, this petition “must resonate strongly amidst the noisy covid clatter.” 

“I so love the gravitas of this grace-filled and divinely inspired document,” Yore said. 

The Bethlehem Declaration concludes with the following appeal expressing the intention of this petition: 

We therefore respectfully appeal to the Holy Father, the CDF, all Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, lay faithful, and all people of good will to vehemently oppose the reception of these morally tainted, dangerous, and ineffective products, along with the gravely unjust mandates for their reception being imposed upon millions of students and workers across the Christian West. 

 

The Bethlehem Declaration:  
Challenging the moral liceity of the abortion-tainted experimental injections for COVID-19 and calling for universal opposition to ‘vaccine mandates’ 

 'For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man’ (GS 22). 

 

Whereas the Second Vatican Council rightly summarized the horror of abortion classifying it as an “abominable crime” which also encompasses a “supreme dishonour to the Creator” (GS 51 § 3; 27);  

Whereas St. John Paul II taught all must oppose such deliberate “murder” of the most vulnerable with “maximum of determination” (EV, 58; CL, 38); 

Whereas, the sanctity of pre-born babies, created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:27), is gravely violated by their utilitarian exploitation and commodification; thereby furthering the descent of the human race into “a civilization of ‘things’ and not of ‘persons’, a civilization in which persons are used in the same way as things are used” (St. John Paul II, GS, 13);  

Whereas all of the experimental COVID-19 gene-based vaccines currently available in the Western world, are abortion-tainted having been tested or developed through the abuse of stolen fetal cells from the bodies of murdered pre-born children… 

 

TO CONTINUE READING THE BETHLEHEM DECLARATION AND SEE ITS INITIAL SIGNATORIES CLICK HERE 




**Photo Credit:  Mike Baumeister on Unsplash

  Hide Petition Text

A frequent visitor to TV platforms, Dr Martin Blachier, who had previously argued in favor of most of France’s freedom-killing restrictions, confirmed Delfraissy’s position on CNews, the only major French TV station where “dissident” opinions can sometimes be expressed regarding the COVID narrative. 

“The sanitary pass serves to push people to take the third dose,” said Blachier. 

“And for the rest, it’s useless?” asked Pascal Praud, the show’s anchor.  

“Of course, it’s useless, and we know it,” replied Blachier.  

“Look at the slope of infections we have today,” he continued.  

“It’s the same as during the first wave. If the pass prevented infections…”  

Here Blachier was interrupted by another participant who said the vaccination objective was a correct one. 

At that point Praud underscored that the public narrative about the pass had been that it would allow people who could not infect each other to meet in certain places. She accused the authorities of consistently “lying” and being “cynical.”  

“They wouldn’t close the nightclubs if they thought the pass protected anyone,” Blachier added.  

He has recently come out vigorously against the “vaccination” for children aged 5 to 11 that is presently under discussion – but then he has young children of his own. 

As to the “protection” against “severe” COVID that the Spike protein injections are supposed to afford, this is also being increasingly contradicted by reality. It transpired recently that the official French health statistics agency DREES had obfuscated half of the vaccinated COVID patients who were in hospital under “critical care” earlier this month, in order to present public figures pointing to a so-called majority of unvaccinated in serious condition. The DREES “forgot” to count all the vaccinated in its national statistics, a fact that was obvious when adding up all the hospitalized “vaccinated” patients mentioned in regional statistics. 

According to Patrice Gibertie, a highly qualified economics, history, and geopolitics university professor emeritus: “Starting from the total of the regional figures, we arrive at 6 times less non-vaccinated patients in critical care than vaccinated patients: 75 percent of vaccinated hospitalized patients as compared to 75 percent of the population… There is no benefit!” 

Comments

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.

2 Comments

    Loading...