EU: In July 13th French President Emmanuel Macron announced that, beginning later this month, French citizens will need proof of Covid19 “vaccination”, or a negative test, to access public transport, clubs, cafes, shops and supermarkets. He also stated that healthcare workers would face mandatory vaccination:
Quite why Macron’s handlers had him make this announcement the day before Bastille Day we will never know, especially considering the Macron regime’s year-long siege at the hands of the Gilets Jaunes movement only came to an end when the “pandemic” hit.
Nevertheless, that’s what he did…and the outcry was as vociferous as it was predictable.
“Liberté, Liberté, Liberté” 🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷
The French leading the way against mandatory vaccinations and vaccine passes.
— Newton Peter Clarke 💎 🇬🇧 (@NewtonClarkeUK) July 15, 2021
Thousands of people took to the streets of cities all across the country. Fittingly, Bastille Day became a day of protests…which turned violent when the police fired tear gas into the crowds.
France is not the only country with active, visible and growing “vaccine” protests.
On Monday the Greek government announced they would be making Covid19 “vaccination” mandatory for some sectors, and since then large crowds have gathered opposing the move and calling for the Prime Minister to resign.
In the UK, Boris Johnson’s government has suggested that “Covid passes” might be necessary for service industries and events in the future, but major nightclub chains have already stated they would not enforce them.
Earlier this week the UK Parliament voted through a bill to force mandatory vaccination on care-home workers, but we should take note the vote was fairly close (319-246, with ~80 abstentions). If you compare this with the overwhelming support for previous coronavirus legislation, you can see (hopefully) some growing resistance.
There was even a hint of desperation surrounding the vote itself. MPs from both main parties criticised the lack of time devoted to the measure (they had only 90 minutes to read and discuss it before voting), the lack of research supporting it (no impact study was included) and the fact the vast majority of MPs were voting by proxy.
Whether the bill makes it through the House of Lords or not, the move is unlikely to do much to quell the huge (and growing) protest movement in the UK. Where crowds estimated upwards of a million people have swept through the capital city on a monthly basis. The protest planned for later this month will likely be the largest yet, and this new legislation will be mostly to blame.
The impact of some of this legislation can already be seen in various authoritarian pilot schemes around the world.
In Texas, a Houston hospital chain was the first major healthcare provider to force its staff to get the vaccine. More than 150 of them either retired in protest or were fired for non-compliance. Projected across a national health service, that could cause thousands upon thousands of people to lose their jobs and prove a major disaster.
In Israel, the controversial “Green Pass” program was abandoned after less than three months due to the vast majority of people simply ignoring it.
Does this demonstrate the way forward? What do you think?
- Will Macron be forced to backtrack due to popular unrest?
- Was the announcement coinciding with Bastille Day deliberate? Why?
- Will the Greek Primie Minister be forced to resign?
- Will the UK introduce domestic vaccine passports?
- If they do, what’s the best way to avoid them?
- What would the impact on the NHS be if mass firings/resignations took place?
- Is mass non-compliance the answer?
Discuss in the comments below.
Join: 👉 https://t.me/acnewspatriots
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.