Covidistan Annals III: Health Minister claims authority to add future jabs at his discretion

A first look at the Committee of Public Safety's 'vax mandate' draft legislation, and it doesn't bode well: better grab your pitchforks

Yesterday, the Committee of Public Safety presented its proposed draft legislation that shall subject all of Covidistan’s residents to the Covid-19 ‘vaccines’. While I had planned to write a summary of this week, this development must take precedence due to its presumed impact.

Two things must be noted before we get started:

1. The Committee kept to its MO (governance-by-press briefing), by which is meant that a couple of régime officials held a press conference, thus, again, bypassing regular parliamentary procedures.

2. As expected, and as some MPs also complained about, the régime didn’t provide parliament with an advance copy, hence the following is based on state media reports.

That said, let’s take a look, based on a piece that appeared on ORF.at yesterday. The following isn’t based on the draft legislation (as of 10 Dec. afternoon).

The Vax Mandate Proposal Heard Around the World

Yesterday, the Committee of Public Safety unveiled the key components of Covidistan’s already-infamous ‘vaccination mandate’. It will supposedly apply in a quasi-universal way for all residents older than 14. The Committee’s draft legislation will certainly pass parliament, as it is supported not only the régime but also by all other parties except for the Freedom Party.

There are supposedly exceptions for pregnant women and those who, on certified medical grounds, ‘cannot take the jab’, as the above-referred piece holds.

(Tyrant Mückstein is the (moron) with the mask on the left; grabbed from the ORF piece.)

Still, Health Minister Mückstein hold, with my emphasis added,

‘that vaccination for pregnant women is “explicitly recommended”. There are also “clear recommendations” for this in the application recommendations of the National Immunisation Panel. There are also exceptions for recovered—delimited to 180 days from the day of their positive PCR test. Recovered individuals can prove their reason for exemption with a certificate of recovery or convalescence. However, recovery is not to be entered into the Central Immunisation Registry.’

This is highly, highly problematic, on two main accounts

First, the manufacturer (Pfizer, which is by far the most widely-used ‘vaccince’ in Covidistan) holds the following in its ‘risk summary’:

‘Available data on COMIRNATY administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.’

This means that Health Minister Mückstein—who’s holds an MD and prior to his appointment practiced medicine in Vienna—apparently misinformed the public about this. Given the sad and sorry state of the data (on which I highly recommend Dr. Chris Martenson’s analysis over at PeakProsperity), this is a statement that isn’t supported by any data. As Martenson concludes, again with my emphasis added:

‘Naturally, without being able to articulate the actual risk, true informed consent is not possible for pregnant women seeking to understand what the risks might be to their unborn child. All that can truthfully be said is “we don’t know”.’

Second, thus, the issue of liability returns to the forefront: who is liable for any potential adverse events? We (kinda) know that governments all around the world exempted manufacturers from liabilities, thus the question becomes:

Who’s going to be left with the stinking bag of vax-poh-poh here? Is it all the physicians who ‘explained’ the unknown risks to their patients? Is is the régime that seeks to mandate these experimental ‘vaccines’?

We don’t know at this point. I’ve already enquired about this with the Covidistan Dept. of Justice and, amazingly fast, received the following non-committal answer earlier today:

‘The Federal Ministry of Justice is an administrative body of the federal government and has to ensure the independence of the administration of justice in the organisation and the administration of justice that safeguards the legal protection interests of the population, but regrettably cannot itself offer individual legal advice.

We can only recommend that, in the case of specific legal questions, you make use of appropriate legal advice (Bar Association, Chamber of Notaries) or a professional legal advisor.’

So, I went on to ask the Vienna Bar Association, whose answer came equally fast, but which reads equally non-committal, if not as bad as the one I received from the Justice Dept.: no legal information would be divulged via email, but they offered free advice, which I shall seek to obtain next week.

Let’s return to the ORF piece to find out what else is in the draft legislation.

Quarterly ‘Jabs of Loyalty’ and High Fines

Once every quarter, ‘Jab of Loyalty Days’ will be organised, on which ‘all persons covered by the vaccination requirement must be vaccinated or have an exemption reason entered in the Central Vaccination Register’. The first such ‘loyalty purge’ (my words) date will be 15 March 2022, Mückstein said.

If you thought that this is outrageous, there’s more to get agitated about, as per ORF:

‘Those who fail to register shall face fines of up to 3,600 €, albeit one’s income is supposedly taken into account. Alternatively, an “fast-tracked procedure” can be implemented, which foresees penalties of up to 600 €. Unvaccinated people are supposed to be asked quarterly to be vaccinated or to have an exemption reason entered in the vaccination register. “If this is not the case, penalties are imposed quarterly”, Mückstein added.

Provided one receives a citation, one can still avert paying the fine by getting vaccinated—as long as the administrative proceedings are not concluded, according to the Ministry of Health. Minister Edtstadler further clarified that in the context of “active remorse”, one could still “vaccinate one’s way out” of the fine.’

If you thought this kind of authoritarian horse manure intolerable, there’s much more of this in the ORF piece (and which I’m loath to translate: I’m angry enough already).

There’s at least until 10 January 2022 to ‘review’ the draft legislation (that is, once it’s actually submitted to parliament).

Is there a way out?

Probably so, and that’s the régime’s own criteria of ‘safe and effective’ and hence it shall be ‘reasonable’ to enforce this mandate.

Personally, I see the onset of widespread ‘vax failure’ as a harbinger of things to come. Once ‘safety’ and ‘vaccine efficacy’ drop even further than where they are right now, I suppose that the law will not be enforced.

There’s one more thing I wish to highlight here, which displays why I call this entire shitshow ‘the Covid Coup’ and use words, such as ‘Committee of Public Safety’ and ‘régime’. Here’s ORF once more, with my emphasis added:

‘Should it become apparent in the course of the pandemic that further vaccinations are necessary (for example, an adapted fourth jab), then Mückstein claims the authority to change the specifications of the law accordingly. The same applies to any new vaccines, which can similarly be imposed by executive order of the Minister of Health.’

In short: the Committee of Public Safety claims the authority to force-jab anyone at the whim of the ‘Health Ministry’.

In other words: this law isn’t ‘just’ an abomination, a miscarriage of process, and a despicable power-grab. This piece of shit (both the draft legislation and Mückstein) claim the authority to violate anyone’s bodily sovereignty at will.

According to Natural Law, both the proposed legislation and any authority the Covid putschists claim are null and void.

It is they who violate the Austrian constitution.

It is they who claim extraordinary powers that past totalitarian (evil) forces never claimed.

This is the line in the sand: if this isn’t opposed by everyone, where will these evildoers stop?

Go, grab ye pitchforks, this must be stopped at all cost.