Last modification 54 there is
The criminalization of truth has been publicly enthroned
The criminalization of truth has been publicly enthronedInternational Network - Apr 30, 2024
The mask falls.
The devil is the confusionist par excellence, the one who constantly creates confusion. The Greek word “diabolos” means nothing else. The lie is therefore what is particularly diabolical. He sows discord, sets men against each other, disrupts the natural order. In the Gospel of John 8:44, the devil is rightly called the “father of lies”.
In Germany, lying has become even more lawful in recent weeks. More specifically, it has become a state religion that demands submission. Indeed, since Friday, when the Bundestag adopted the so-called "self-determination" law, all people living in Germany are now required by law to believe the blatant lies, to take them as true, or at least to keep quiet about them.
Anyone who nevertheless opens their mouth and rightly points out that Gabriele is actually called Hans-Günther, risks paying a fine of up to 10 euros if they now call a person by their biological sex then that he/she wants to be “perceived” differently. Thanks to the law, it will no longer be necessary to undergo sex change surgery and have the change officially certified. Offices are required by law to assist in the falsification of documents. And everyone else is forced to live in and with the lie and evade it.
It's satanic. Since a Friday in April, we have taken a good step forward in the construction of an evil and unnatural world, the basis of which is falsity. The criminalization of truth has now been publicly enthroned and is knocking on everyone's door. And since evil, to maintain itself, cannot stop, but must always go further, submit to ever wider areas, this is only the beginning.
You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist for this: it is now explicit that what is "normal", natural, right for life, is officially declared criminal and prosecuted as such, it is that is to say: heterosexuality, the family, the offspring, the people. Evil becomes totalitarian. The biblical image is the reign of the Antichrist, which must necessarily precede the final victory of good. We will be amazed at what will follow, with increasing frequency. The coronaviresque dictatorship was the dress rehearsal. There will soon be martyrs.
It is certainly no coincidence that the European Parliament has asked these days, in a resolution adopted by a large majority, that the right to abortion be declared a fundamental right (!). The openly totalitarian legislation on “hate speech” in many Western countries, which sometimes provides for prison sentences of several years for crimes of opinion (in the name of “tolerance”!), also falls into this area; just like the fact that the Federal Constitutional Court, the highest legal body of the Federal Republic, attempts to define the notion of natural, that is to say ethnic, people as "contrary to the Basic Law", both in the procedure of banning the NPD than now vis-à-vis the AfD – all freely inspired by Orwell war is peace, freedom is slavery, death is is life. It's perverse. It is the dictatorship of lies.
We must take note of the internal dynamic of evolution, which is not human, but ultimately spiritual: evil versus good. This is why it is not the expression of a personal belief, but the adequate description of what is happening, to introduce the devil into the game, as the fundamental cosmic adversary. He drops his mask. This is seen in all areas of life. Apocalypse – the period we are currently experiencing – means nothing other than revelation.
The good news in all of this is that Satan does not have the last word. The lie, which forms a false idea of the world, is no more viable than cancer. The Federal Republic of Germany was founded on lies from the beginning, and lies now become essential to the sham that is the German federal state. This is why this republic is soon coming to an end. The “law on self-determination” and all the aberrations to come are the indispensable stigmata.
Last modification 54 there is
Google: from May 22, 2024, deletion of content and accounts
Google: from May 22, 2024, deletion of content and accountsThe Media in 4-4-2 - Apr 20, 2024
Google reserves the right to take action against users who violate the Terms of Service, ranging from removal of content to account suspension or termination.
The anti-sectarian law will hurt Google users, which is pretty much everyone. Google reserves the right to modify and delete your account. Not obeying the famous “community rules” could even land you in court. The collapse of freedom of expression and information is announced. Right for the European election campaign.
Google owns 93,18% of online search. Its new conditions of censorship – sorry, its new conditions of use – therefore imply enormous repercussions throughout Europe. From May 22, 2024, right during the European election campaign — how weird! — Google warns you: “[…] if you violate our Terms of Service, our remedies are not limited to suspension or termination of your access to the Services, but may include other remedies under applicable law […]”.
Google knows what's good for you
“We pursue a rigorous product study program. Therefore, before changing a service or no longer offering it, we carefully consider your interests as a user, your reasonable expectations, and their potential impact on you and others. We only change services or stop offering them for good reason. »
Besides, it's that or nothing: “If you do not accept these new conditions, delete your content and cease all use of our services. You can also end your relationship with us at any time by closing your Google account. » And the threat ends with: “Thank you for using Google services! » Break up!
The sects are you, the haters
The law “against sectarian aberrations” aims to “require internet service providers (ISPs) and online content hosts to contribute to the fight against abuse of weakness and the crime of subjection, following the example of what is already imposed on them to fight against academic or moral harassment or even incitement to hatred. » Google therefore complies with the new legislation.
Described as a charlatan by Olivier Véran, Professor Didier Raoult is one of the first targets of the anti-sectarian aberrations law which targets, among others, “deviant” health professionals. There were not many deputies on the day the law was voted on. So who was really interested in it? who wrote it and ultimately who issued Google's new conditions? Maybe McKinsey, but undoubtedly the Pfizer, Rockefeller, JPMorgan, Rothschild, Vanguard, BlackRock & Co. sect. So Google is the victim of a sectarian conspiracy? No, because Google belongs to those who created this law. He is therefore one of those responsible. Very officially, Google is warning you: from May 22, 2024, from now on, you are the sect! And vote well!
Last modification 54 there is
Switzerland: Establishment of the “global health” surveillance regime
International Network - March 12, 2024
Switzerland: The revision of the law on epidemics establishes the surveillance regime for “global health”. Professionals and concerned citizens are calling for responses to the consultation on the project before March 22.
On November 29, 2023, the Federal Council opened the consultation procedure relating to the partial revision of the law on epidemics. Little debated, the project nevertheless introduces fundamental changes by passing the exceptional measures of the Covid law into ordinary law. With vaccination certificates, screening, tracing and other controversial interventions, the law confirms the shift from disease surveillance to surveillance of people.
It also transfers authority to the WHO within the framework of the “treaty” on pandemics and amendments to the International Health Regulations, the texts of which will only be communicated on the eve of the vote at the next World Assembly of health, May 27, 2024. “Global health” mentioned in the law would discreetly supplant national policies and constitutional rights, which guarantee the freedom of choice of patients and the plurality of therapeutic approaches. This is why many citizens are sounding the alarm, inviting the population and the parties concerned to react before it is too late.
New attacks on freedoms
The new version of the law on epidemics seems to cement into law the measures taken during the Covid crisis, without worrying about the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. The text lists a series of potential threats to public health to which only a heavy regime of centralization, digitalization, surveillance, and obligations seems to be able to respond.
Several provisions go further than the constraints imposed during the Covid period. For example, we see vaccination obligations discreetly emerging, even though they constitute a violation of physical integrity, a fundamental right nevertheless considered inviolable in Switzerland.
Another strengthening of measures concerns the freedom to assemble (article 22 of the Constitution). Article 40 of the new law now intends to regulate in a more systematic and restricted manner the collection of people's contact details, work from home activities or demonstrations in public spaces.
Return of the health certificate
Without too much surprise, the health certificate is making a comeback, despite the opposition of almost half of the Swiss to its use and the population's rejection of digital identity. The law gives the Federal Council the possibility of defining a document for entering and leaving another country, and it can of course be linked to corresponding foreign systems. In addition, it intends to add other health data that doctors, hospitals and public and private health institutions would be obliged to declare.
We are thus moving from the current logic of reporting illnesses to an obligation to declare people. Article 12 provides for the declaration of “information enabling the identification of people who are sick, presumed sick, infected, presumed infected or excreting pathogenic agents” (lit. a), as well as “in particular socio-demographic and behavioral data , including data on the intimate sphere” (lit. c).
For Dr Philippe Vallat, independent public health expert, this is a real paradigm shift:
“We will no longer be considered sick because we feel that way, or because a doctor has determined so, but administratively by default. This would establish a new medical paradigm based on generalized suspicion, with everyone being a priori “presumed” to be sick or infected. This would lead to the need to prove that one is not contagious, and therefore not dangerous to others. How ? The project says nothing about it, but the Covid experience of the certificate showed how an administrative system based on scientifically inadequate measures opened the door to arbitrariness and discrimination.
In his proposed motion on the bill, journalist Guy Mettan also believes that it is more of a control measure than a health intervention:
“Article 49b provides for the maintenance of the health certificate, originally established as a means of avoiding the spread of the virus, while the reality of the Covid crisis has shown that it is an administrative document inoperative in public health, vaccination does not prevent transmission.
The digital identity handed over to the profession by the CF, the health certificate introduced in the draft revision of the law on epidemics and the electronic patient file contribute to the abolition of the private sphere and the establishment of a globalized control of our lives.
The example of Belgium confirms these hypotheses: local authorities and the federal government voted to return the health certificate on February 8. They authorized the handing over of its verification keys to WHO and extended the validity of old documents with retroactive effect. Officially, the health certificate (Covid Safety Ticket) has been operational again since July 1, 2023, the date on which the European Union transferred its system to the WHO with a view to creating a global digital certificate.
The certificate will soon be included in the European digital wallet which will contain other health data and will be linked to the European digital identity and biometric data. Other administrative documents should be added, for example insurance, driving license, and very probably banking data.
Transfers of powers
Although the principles of autonomy are reaffirmed in the texts, in practice we are witnessing a centralization of powers around health. Thus, the law on epidemics defines 32 “delegated powers” to the federal government, which will reduce the power of the cantons to an empty shell, while continuing to pay half of the bill.
But above all, it is the attack on national sovereignty that is worrying. There is a clause in the law triggering “the particular situation in Switzerland” by the WHO (art. 6b). And, according to the amended article 12 of the IHR, the Director General of the WHO, after consulting an emergency committee, would have the power to announce alone and without possibility of contestation the potential or actual appearance of a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC), including a pandemic, and to declare its end.
Furthermore, the law seems to incorporate content from the WHO CA+ Pandemic Treaty and the revision of the international health regulations, although these will only be known at the end of the current negotiations.
For critics of the law, the will of the WHO is clear: with the modification of articles 1, 13a, 42, 53a, 54bis of the IHR, all the recommendations of the WHO (e.g.: compulsory certificates, quarantine , vaccination certificates or the constitution of stocks of medicines) would become binding on the signatory States.
The WHO would also expand its field of competence, in particular with catch-all concepts such as “One Health”, the notion of “one health” thanks to which it could also deal with the climate, animals, agriculture , education or transport to name just a few areas concerned.
It’s the same with the notion of “infodemics” and its strategy of “fighting disinformation”. The organization seems to want to transform itself into a “ministry of scientific truth”, with its censorship and propaganda campaigns. It intends to force States to combat sources of “disinformation” and their authors in the various media and on social networks.
Last modification 54 there is
MPs alerted to the liberticidal excesses of a bill
MPs alerted to the liberticidal excesses of a billFrance Evening - Feb 13, 2024
BonSens.org alerts deputies to the liberticidal excesses of the bill on sectarian abuses
In a letter to deputies entitled "bill on sectarian abuses", the BonSens.org association alerts the national representation to the unacceptable clauses for democracy, fundamental freedoms, freedom of expression which range from scientific debates to freedom of expression of scientists and doctors and protection of whistleblowers.
The letter was sent on February 9, 2024 to the presidents of groups in the National Assembly as well as to those not registered and by email to each French deputy so that they become aware of this critical situation. Namely the fact that the Law Commission saw fit to restore “those articles which only found validity in the worst dictatorships.”
“With this bill that you are preparing to vote on, and in particular articles 4 and 5, these medical and scientific alerts could no longer be launched under penalty of risk of imprisonment and fines for those who risk doing so.”
The entire letter is reproduced below.
Madam Deputy, Mr. Deputy
This is a very serious time for our democracy, our fundamental freedoms, the freedom of scientific debate, the freedom of doctors and scientists to express themselves, and the protection of whistleblowers.
You will soon have to vote on a bill [1] aimed at “strengthening the fight against sectarian abuses”. In this text of law, however recently expunged by the Senate of three articles dangerous for our republican and democratic life, in particular articles 4 and 5, aimed at establishing new offenses in the Penal Code, the law commission saw fit to restore these articles which only found validity in the worst dictatorships.
If you are not convinced of the danger represented by these articles 4 and 5, you must remember that recent history has revealed, thanks to a free press and courageous whistleblowers, numerous health scandals where the authorities themselves the same were condemned. Here are two fairly recent examples that you certainly haven't forgotten yet.
In the case of MEDIATOR from SERVIER laboratories [2], a drug marketed for 33 years from 1976 to 2009, accused of having caused the death of 1 to 500 people in France, not counting those still suffering from the consequences of side effects .
The whistleblower of the time was the pulmonologist IRÈNE FRACHON.
The CONDEMNATIONS were handed down in 2021 (and in 2023 after appeal by the Servier Group)
The Serviera Group was found guilty of endangering health, fraud, homicide and involuntary injuries, influence peddling and improperly obtaining marketing and fined 180 million euros paid to the victims and 415 million euros to social organizations/Mutuals
The ANS was fined 303 euros for negligence. (at the time Afssaps for French Agency for the Safety of Health Products)
In the LEVOTHYROX case [3], the change in the drug's formula in 2017 by Merck led to numerous reports of adverse effects in pharmacovigilance and victims filed complaints. The ANSM assured that the adverse effects were due to a thyroid imbalance caused by the change in treatment and not to the new formula. However, in March 2018, a criminal investigation was opened. Researchers from the University of Toulouse concluded that the new formula did not provide sufficient guarantees for patients. Merck was convicted in 2020 for having committed a mistake during the change of formula and had to pay 3,3 million euros to the plaintiffs.
At the end of 2022, Merck was indicted for aggravated deception and ANSM was also indicted for deception.
There were also the cases of contaminated blood, Dépakine, Distilbene, growth hormones, Isomeride, Vioxx, Thalidomide that the French remember.
With this bill that you are preparing to vote on, and in particular articles 4 and 5, these medical and scientific alerts could no longer be launched under penalty of risk of imprisonment and fines for those who risk doing so.
It is critical that you realize this.
Even the Council of State has spoken out against these provisions.
In an opinion dated November 9, 2023 [4], the COUNCIL OF STATE considered that the targeted facts were already covered by the repression of the illegal practice of medicine. According to this opinion, the measure could infringe on freedom of expression, when it is exercised through "a general and impersonal speech, for example held on a blog or a social network" and call into question, "by an incrimination of challenges to the current state of therapeutic practices, the freedom of scientific debates and the role of whistleblowers.
What is true one day in science is not always true the next day, and this has been the case since the world began because science is constantly evolving through new data that emerges.
Constructive criticism and questioning of information are essential aspects of the scientific process, and this should be done transparently and respectfully. A scientific consensus only has value over a limited period and only if it takes into account divergent opinions Science is an ongoing debate, stifling this debate in the name of a false consensus amounts to killing both any progress or any corrective mechanism. It is the pluralism of ideas – and not censorship – that makes us progress.
Faced with the abnormal and often illegal influence (known corrupt practices and taking of interest) of pharmaceutical laboratories in Public Health decisions, it is essential to preserve the safeguard of freedom of expression on these issues. health, and in particular for doctors, scientists, and citizen defense associations or associations of victims of adverse drug reactions.
For example, because the marketing authorizations for Covid-19 vaccines were only based on clinical trials carried out by the vaccine manufacturers themselves, and no randomized clinical study had been carried out. independently, then we are witnessing a resounding failure undermining public discourse, changing discourse according to new data. Unfortunately today, traditional vaccination suffers from these errors, from these erroneous announcements by health authorities which have lost credibility.
Remember, in the Covid-19 crisis that we went through, the discourse of the health authorities evolved from: “All vaccinated, All protected” with “safe and effective” vaccines with 95% effectiveness towards a discourse where vaccines ultimately did not protect against infection, but only serious forms and, finally several months after the start of vaccinations, recognized serious adverse effects of myocarditis and pericarditis especially in young men, a population not at risk who had not need to be vaccinated and who have been put at unnecessary risk of a chronic illness potentially with a very serious course, or hemorrhagic menstrual disorders (recognized late by health authorities) potentially requiring hospitalization in young women whose At this time there is no certainty about the impact this may have had on their fertility.
Remember, there was even an abandonment of certain vaccines (AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson) for those under 55 due to very serious risks of thrombosis, including the death of young Anthony Rio, 24, who was recognized linked to vaccination [5]. Without the alerts of doctors, scientists, victims' associations, how many deaths could these vaccines have caused among young people?
In History, this is always how health scandals have been brought to light: through the free speech of doctors, scientists, citizens, victims' associations, citizens' associations, who fight for months or even years. years, before the health authorities reacted or the courts could rule.
Did you think about this law from an international point of view? Do you know that treatments against certain pathologies are authorized in certain countries (Covid19 [6] [7], Cancer [8] [9], Lyme Disease [10] etc) and not in others like France? What do you think of the health authorities in these countries? What are sects? Just because their national protocols are different from those decided in France by the ANSM and the HAS9? Do you see the nonsense of this law?
And finally have you thought about French scientific research?
When article 4 of the draft announces “When these offenses are committed through the written or audiovisual press, the specific provisions of the laws which govern these matters are applicable with regard to the determination of the persons responsible. ", but what about the foreign press and media?
Legally, could French scientists who publish in a foreign journal be liable to prosecution depending on the content of their study or their scientific position?
Article 4 of this bill [11] would prevent French scientists from publishing their work, including in French and international scientific journals, and this would be a major risk for the credibility of French research.
Certainly the Order of Physicians has not thought about it because it does not carry out scientific research, but YOU must think about it and prevent this.
It is essential to vote against articles 4 and 5 of the bill against “sectarian abuses” because these articles have nothing to do with the subject of sects, they are only censorship dangerous for science and for public health .
To conclude, it seems important to us to recall that freedom of expression was successively enshrined in article 11 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (August 24, 1789 [12], article 10 of 1950 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms [13] and Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [14].
Articles 4 and 5 of this bill also recall dark hours in history and in particular the Law of Suspects [15].
Passed on August 12, 1793, in the midst of the Terror of which it became the best instrument, this law allowed the immediate arrest, without reason or proof, of all those who "have not constantly demonstrated their attachment to the Revolution" or of those who “having done nothing against Liberty, have done nothing for it”.
Here, these articles will make it possible to prosecute without proof, all those who have an opinion different from that of the health authorities on the therapeutic virtues of (possibly new) products placed on the market by pharmaceutical laboratories. No criticism will be permitted and in the end not only those who doubt the quality of these products, but also all those who refuse to prescribe them, will be suspected of sectarian excesses.
We must, however, remember that the “Law of Suspects swept away the revolutionaries themselves, who ended up falling in their turn under the influence of this double-edged law that they made to get rid of their enemies.”
Let us never forget this.
We thank you for having read our alert on what should be called a legislative drift – at a minimum – in terms of science and its evolution.
Very respectfully,
The entire BonSens.org team
Last modification 54 there is
The imperative military programming law: towards a masked coup?
France Evening - Jul 06, 2023
Would the imperative LPM be the last mask of a coup d'etat?
The summer months or the period between Christmas and New Year's Day are times of relaxation for most of the population, the controversies and oppositions suddenly disappear like snow melting in the sun. We must therefore be wary of the laws passed at these times which are opportune for governments to discreetly pass projects. The conflagration of the suburbs which frightens citizens and politicians has the ideal characteristics to pass texts of a liberticidal nature. Under cover of an increased demand for security for fear of a general conflagration, certain draconian texts can easily be voted on discreetly. What does the new military programming law hide?
An unusual procedure
The new military programming law (LPM) 2024-2030 currently under discussion includes surprising and worrying provisions in terms of requisitions, deeply prejudicial to public freedoms left to the discretion of the executive, provisions which are starting to cause reactions here and there.
The LPM is an exercise that has been repeated every five years since the end of the 1990s, which saw the suspension of national military service and the establishment of the professional army. The programming laws, provided for in article 34 of the 1958 Constitution, “determine the objectives of State action”. Unlike ordinary laws or organic laws, programming laws normally have no effect other than indicative. The LPM is therefore not intended by the Constitution to be an imperative law, it is not intended to set in stone permanent provisions. Essentially a budget forecasting tool, the LPM, in its findings and forecasts, intends to provide medium-term visibility to allow the preparation and voting of annual finance laws and, consequently, to provide the armies with the means necessary to fulfill their mission.
The specificity of the LPM is moreover to be rarely respected in practice, always to the detriment of the armies.
The current Bill relating to military programming for the years 2024 to 2030 and containing various provisions relating to defence, includes, in application of the second part of its title, legislative riders modifying in a profound and permanent manner the Defense Code by tackling public freedoms head-on.
Last modification 54 there is
Great Britain: Large-scale data collection and analysis
Great Britain: Large-scale data collection and analysisDigital Dawn - Nov 09, 2022
The UK government is teaming up with mobile operator O2 on a 'big data' project to monitor the behavior of millions of people.
In the United Kingdom, the National Security Centre, aka "SitCen", a government agency, has contracted with the Spanish telecommunications company Telefonica, with the aim of using mobile data to obtain "information" on a range wide enough range of people's behaviors. And it's millions of people. A third of the UK's population, in fact – if the telecoms are to be believed.
The deal is to give big data-hungry SitCen access to information from Telefonica's O2 Motion Data & Insights service in the UK.
During this period, the SitCen – created last year as a centralized place run by the Cabinet Office for emergency response – and O2 will work together to turn data extracted from users' phones into "insights" about their movements ( location), their mobility habits (mode of transport), as well as information related to behavior and demographics.
This data will be both real-time and anonymous, promise the project promoters.
Last modification 54 there is
The Prize for Freedom: “open letter to Mr. Macron”
The Prize for Freedom: “open letter to Mr. Macron”Gendarme profession - 06 Sep 2022
No, I don't want to pay what you call; wrongly "the price of freedom" and which is only the price of your faults, your blindness, your ambition.
If it is indisputable that freedom has a price, it is still necessary to analyze where and by whom freedom is threatened, who are responsible for attacks on this freedom, who are its defenders and finally what is the price and who must pay.
Yes, your responsibility in this crisis and your fault is enormous.
Last modification 54 there is
The WHO treaty on pandemics, a “liberticidal and anti-democratic” project
France Evening - June 08, 2022
The International Alliance for Justice and Democracy organized a press conference at the Geneva Press Club on May 28 entitled "The centralization of power in the hands of the WHO threatens democracy".
On May 28, the closing day of the 75th World Health Assembly, an annual high mass which, from May 22, brought together the 194 Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva to decide on its policy, the International Alliance for Justice and Democracy organized a press conference at the Geneva Press Club entitled "The centralization of power in the hands of the WHO threatens democracy".
Broadcast on the website of the Children's Health Defense association, founded by lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr., the objective of the event was to sound the alarm on amendments to the WHO's international health regulations (IHR) proposed by Washington, for the moment rejected, and on the "pandemic treaty" being developed by the institution.
