Notes From the Upside Down XIII: here's my comment to the EU Commission
Feel free to plagiarise and tell them to stick that 'proposal' up their proverbial ^_^
As a resident of Norway (since summer 2020), I have personal experience with a regulatory environment that differs markedly from experiences in my home country, Austria. In Norway, much less pressure was applied throughout the Sars-Cov-2/Covid-19 ‘epidemic’ (which is the term Norwegian authorities use), yet both vaccination uptake and ‘bad outcomes’ (hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death) are much lower here than in many other parts of Europe. Also, the outright unacceptable scapegoating of ‘the unvaccinated’ has not happened to the same degree than elsewhere in Europe, which still prides itself as having ‘learned from our history’.
When I consider the Commission’s proposal, I am struck beyond disbelief by the sheer cognitive dissonance between the proposed extension of the Covid Passport system: it hasn't worked so far, because the injectable biologicals—which, let’s face it, according to the manufacturers, are ‘gene therapy’ (e.g., Moderna's SEC 10Q filing, 2020, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000168285220000017/mrna-20200630.htm)—and did not play a big, if any, role, in the most recent Omicron wave. The exclusion of ‘recovered’ individuals from normal public life is another nail in the coffin of an individual’s fundamental natural rights, which may only be suppressed, but never ‘taken’, ‘revoked’, or ‘temporarily suspended’.
Taken together, it is obvious that public health authorities in Norway are still observing facts and reacting to popular sentiment: by late Jan./early Feb. 2022, the Institute of Public Health (IPH) recommended revocation of the Covid mandates ‘because they do more harm than good’. As a consequence, over the course of the following weeks, the government has ended these mandates—and life has returned to (almost) ‘normal’ in Norway.
When travelling to other parts of Europe, the difference is stunning beyond belief. These fundamentals are reflected in the IPH’s most recent risk assessment (31 March 2022), which I attached to this comment. This assessment holds, among other things, that ‘population immunity’ (befolkningsimmunitet) and ‘seasonal effects’ (sesongeffekt) are responsible for the ebbing of the winter wave. It is expected that new admissions will continue to decline, and thus ‘the pressures resting on society are receding, which translates into less and less risk for any individual to get infected’ (p. 3). A bit further down, we read that ‘society can continue with normal everyday life without significant anti-Covid measures’, but that ‘groups with elevated risks for a severe disease shall obtain access to vaccines, antiviral treatments, and appropriate advice to reduce infection risks…any change in assessment may be due to, e.g., the appearance of a new virus variant or a reduced effect of vaccination, or perhaps these two in combination’ (p. 4-5; all translations are mine).
Furthermore, in the section on ‘immunity’ (p. 18-19), it is said that ‘vaccine-induced protection against serious illness in the general population is high shortly after a booster injection. Duration of protection is not established due to the short follow-up time. This protection decreases minimally in the first 2-3 months after the booster injection, including among the elderly over the age of 65…combination of vaccination and Sars-Cov-2 infection provides high protection against serious illness in the general population.’
Let that sink in: no data for booster injections post 2-3 months.
Why does the Commission propose to render this category without temporal limits?
What about the exclusion of those whose injection status has ‘expired’?
No mention is made of (medical or other) exemptions for, say, cancer patients.
This proposal is badly crafted, illogical, and at-odds with our professed rights and freedoms.
Think about these issues, and think about your children and grandchildren, and the world they will grow up in before deciding.
Don’t hesitate getting in touch if you’d need help reading Norwegian.
Thanks for letting me crib from your submission, which I've done. Here's what I've just submitted:
I became a resident of Sweden in summer 2020 because of the tyrannical mask and 'vaccine' mandates in the USA, which has been abrogating each provision of the Nuremberg Code. (These 'vaccines' are gene therapies, as Moderna acknowledged to the US SEC in its filing for the quarter ending in June 2020: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000168285220000017/mrna-20200630.htm )
In contrast, Sweden has used almost no mandatory measures, flirting with 'vaccine' passports for only a few weeks, which even then were not mandatory (affected businesses could instead reduce capacity). Sweden has not created a two-class society.
Perhaps, just perhaps, it is excusable that the USA, which never had a powerful Nazi Party (instead importing Nazis after the war), would forget the history behind the Nuremberg Code. But in Europe there is no excuse. Thus, I am beyond horrified that the Commission would propose to extend the 'Green Pass', 'Digital Certificate', or whatever is the current Orwellian name for violating the right of free movement and for coercing us into dangerous experimental gene therapy.
Please remember your humanity, think about the world that you are creating for your children and grandchildren, and reject this tyrannical proposal.
Es ist bizarr, dass das Fortschreiben von Einschränkungen der individuellen Freiheit als Mittel zur teilweisen Wiederherstellung dieser Freiheit verkauft wird. Verzichten Sie auf das Vorhaben! Geben Sie so den Bürgern der EU-Länder ein wenig Hoffnung, dass die EU etwas anderes sein kann als ein technokratisches, undemokratisches, kontrollwütiges Monstrum.