english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow Virus Pass: CoE Warns v. Discrimination/Coercion/Infection Risk (Doubtful Vaccines, Less Protection)

Virus Pass: CoE Warns v. Discrimination/Coercion/Infection Risk (Doubtful Vaccines, Less Protection)

Written by ACM
Tuesday, 22 June 2021
pace_2_coe__eurofora_400

*Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/-  A Stern Warning Against Risks to massively Infect UnWarned innocent People by Jombies Lurring via False Appearances with a few Controversial "Vaccines" of UnKnown + Shrinking Efficacy in, perhaps, Stoping, or Not, the Deadly Virus' Spread, (and Recently found to unexpectedly Expose Many Recipients to Infections ! S. Infra), was Launched by the 47 Member States-strong (Russia + UK included) Organisation for Human Rights, Democracy, and Rule of Law, Strasbourg-based, Council of Europe (CoE), the Oldest PanEuropean Organisation (1949-2021), by adopting Today a landmark Resolution on the Topical Controversy about the Virus' "Pass"/ "Certificates" of Vaccinations, Tests, or Recoveries, Voted by an Overwhelming Majority of MEPs in its Parliamentary Assembly : 96 in Favor, Against Only 2, and 19 Abstentions, (apparently by Some who Wanted an Even "Sharper" Resolution, f.ex. Respectful of Citizens' "Religion", withOut "InEquities", etc., about "Vaccines", as a Blocked Amendment had asked).

pace_eurofora_400 

>>> But, Interestingly, it's with a Landmak "Unanimity" that CoE's PanEuropean Assembly Voted a Crucial Amendment Calling to Not "Institute COVID Pass regimes (but) ONLY WHEN Clear and Well-Established Scientific Evidence exists that such regimes Lower the Risk of the Transmission of the SARC-CoV-2 Virus to an Acceptable Level, from a Public Health point of view"... I.e. a Key-Element, which Currently Lacks, at least until Now, (See, among many others, f.ex. also : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/euandgenemanipsviavirus.html,
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/kennedyjrinberlinonvirusandweb.html,
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/pfijfyjhjh.html [NB*];
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/fdaandcontroversialvirusvaccines.html ,
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/eusummitonvaccinesquestions.html,
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/hoxmerkelwillgoinhistory.html, etc
, and Infra). "This means that Nothing that might Affect Public Health Measures (i.e., f.ex., DeConfinement, etc), should be Done withOut a Sufficiently Certain basis in Scientific Evidence. This certainty is Only Now "Emerging" for the effects on "Transmission Risk" by users of some Controversial "Vaccines", points out CoE's Resolution, Confirming what "Eurofora" had earlier Found, (See : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/pseudovaccinespassportstohell.html, etc).  "Only once there is Certainty about the Effects of Vaccination, recovery from infection, and negative Test results on Transmission Risk (including in particular information on the Effectiveness of different Vaccines, the Duration of protection, etc., it Will be Possible to Evaluate the relevance of Introducing such documents (as the Controversial "Virus' Pass"+) for Non-Medical Purposes, and define the Limits on their use", CoE stresses, as far as the crucial matter of "Timing" is concerned.

----------------------------------

    - Among 3 main Risks, as things sand Nowadays, the First : that of Massive Infections which Might be Provoked in any Society particularly by Less Public Health Protection Measures (Non-Pharmaceutical : f.ex Distancing, Masks, Ventilation, Quarantine, etc) Dangerously Exposing UnAware Innocent People in front of a lot of "Jombies" Boasting to have Official COVID "Passes" or "Certificates" and Lurring by the False Appearances of a few Pseudo-"Vaccines", based on some Novel Genetic Technologies of UnCertain Yet Consequencies, particularly on Spreading, or Not, the Deadly Virus to Other Persons, Contrary to All "Classic" Vaccines, and Never Seen Before in Humankind's History, is, Obviously, the Worst. It Might Result into an "Explosion" of Virus' Spread, sooner or later, with a Lot of Innocent Victims "Trapped" among 3 Controversial Public Policies, (Hasty DeConfinement, MisLeading "Passes/Certificates", with Only a Few, UnCertain Fake-"Vaccines", and practically No Therapy Drugs).

    - AnOther Serious Risk is that of Coercion, eventualy Obliging UnWilling Citizens to be Submitted in one or another Vaccine (among those Selected by some Public Authoriies, Excluding Free Choice), which is, in Principle, an illegal act, Contrary to the General Prohibition of any Imposed Bio-Medical Intervention in a Humann Person's Health, Opposed to his/her Wish, (Requiring an "Informed Consen"), already Since the InFamous NAZI "Tests" in Concentation Camps, (But Even USA's Secret "Tests" on Black a.o. People in a remote Past, etc : See Also World-Famous Swedish Film-Director, Igmar Bergman's awsome Warning in : "The Serpent's Egg", etc), as Human Rights' case-law and CoE's PanEuropean "BioMedical Ethics" Convention (1998) Clearly Prohibits.

Obviously, these 2 Risks Might be Combined, particularly When People Hesitating to Sumbit into Some Controversial Vaccines, may be, in real Practice, Threatened by that Deadly Virus' Infections provoked by "Jombies" whose Dangerosity, or not, is Nowadays Scientificaly UnKnown, as CoE's Report Denounces, i.e. so-called "Vaccinated" Individuals, If they have taken Only some Controversial Novel Tools, (as f.ex. of mRNA-Technology, which, Currently has a Surprizing ..quasi-Monopoly inside the EU..), in the Current Absence of Any Serious and UnContested, Real Scientific Knowledge abou their Dangerosity for Other People and the Society, (Contrary to "Classical" Vaccines, which, Since Pasteur's times, Notoriously Protect All Contacts from any risk of spread of a virus by the recipients of a real vaccine : A quality still Denied to those Novel "mRNA" Tools, by some Senior Medical Scientists, at least in the Present state of Scientific Knowledge, as things stand Nowadas : See Infra). Such a Double Risk may exist particularly If Public Health Protection ("Non-Pharmaceutical") Measures might be Lifted, as far as those "Jombies" are concerned, withOut any due Protection for all Other People that they might Lurre and Infect !

    - 3rd (and Most Probable) Danger, by those Controversial "Virus Passes or Certificates", naturaly might be a Massive, undue "Discrimination" against All Other, UnVaccinated People in a Country, which Manifestly Risks to be Provoked by a Lot of Various Concrete Measures with which Some Public Officials scandalously Attempt to exert Pressure on the People to Submit even to some Controversial so-called "Vaccines", by Allowing them certain Activities which are Prohibited for UnVaccinated People, withOut due Reason, and/or DisProportionaly. Obviously, this, Also, might be Combined to the Above-Mentioned Risks, in order to, eventualy, Impose an (otherwise Prohibited : Comp. Supra) Coercion...

F.ex. CoE, ECHR, and EU Parliament plenaries' Host-City Strasbourg is due to Illustrate such an Example, by Famous Greek Compositor Theodorakis' Musical adaptation of Pablo Neruda's "Canto General", followed by "Jazz" Music, etc, at the superbe Franco-German "2 Shores" Garden on the Rhine river, whose Access is reportedly to be submitted to a "Virus' Pass" Certificate... And things become even More Nasty, when Even the Access of Workers to some Sectors of Activities, (f.ex. Restoration, Health Care, Schools, etc), is Recently Threatened to be Reserved Only to such "Virus Pass"' Holders...

-----------------

>>> CoE's Rapporteur, Swiss Liberal MEP Damien Cottier, (seconded by Opinion Rapporteur from the Social Affairs Committee, Center-Right ChristianDemocrat/EPP MEP Ms Carmen Leyte from Spain), Consulted several TrustWorthy sources, such as 2 Eminent Experts : Professor Siobhan O’Sullivan, Chief Bioethics Officer at the Department of Health in Ireland, Professor of Healthcare Ethics and Law at the Royal College of Surgeons, Vice-President of EU Commission’s Group on Ethics in Science, and Vice-President of CoE's Committee on Bio-Ethics (DH-BIO); and Professor Ross Upshur, of the University of Toronto's School of Public Health, Canada, Co-President of the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Ethics and Covid-19 Expert Group. As well as Professor Samia Hurst, Bio-Ethics Expert, Director of the Institut Éthique Histoire Humanités at Geneva University, and Vice-President of the Swiss National Covid-19 Task Force. Moreover, that CoE's Resolution is Also Based on an Important CoE's Secretary General, Marija Buric - Pejčinović's Written "Statement on Human Rights and the <<Vaccine Pass>>", issued on 31 March 2021, (See : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/coewarnsoneuvaccinationpassports.html, etc), and on CoE's BioEthics' Committee's "Statement on Human Rights considerations relevant to <<Vaccine Pass>>", as well as on CoE's Personal Data Protection's "Statement on Covid-19 Vaccination, Attestations, and Data Protection". To all this was, Meanwhile, Added also a Pioneer CoE Assembly's Debate on those Issues, held on 19 April 2021, (just Before German Chancelor Angie Merkel's Key-Note Speech), that Nowadays' Rapporteur Cottier Includes among his Main Sources.

    + A Landmark Input, from the Legal point of view, is, particularly, the French Highest Court on Administrative Law : the prestigious "Conseil d'Etat"'s Ruling of last April (1/4/2021), which Judged that those kind of so-called "Vaccinated People (mainly by RNA Genetic novel tools), could ... Still Carry the Virus, and, thereby, Contribute to its Spread, to an Extend that was, at Present, Difficult to Quantify". And this Fact, "Based on the Evidence Available at the Time", Still depends on "Scientific Knowledge (which) Evolves" Currently, having Not Yet Concluded, as CoE's Rapporteur rightfully observes.

    ++ In Addition, EU's European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), reportedly Found, on 21 April 2021, a real "Risk of Developing Severe Covid-19 Disease for an UnVaccinated adult who has been in Contact with a fully Vaccinated person (by Controversial "RNA" or Other Genetic Novel Tool, Contrary to Classic Vaccines)exposed to SARS-CoV-2 Infection", at least in a real "moderate" form of "Risk in Older Adults, or Persons with Underlying Risk Factors".  Moreover, ECDC "took into Account a Study from Scotland that Virus' <<Transmission can Vary, by Vaccine product, Target Group, and SARS-CoV-2 Variant>>"

    => As a Consequence, among others, "“in the Current Epidemiological context in the EU/European Economic Area, in Public Spaces and large Gatherings, including during Travel, NPIs (Non-Pharmaceutical interventions, such as Masks and social Distancing) should be Maintained, Irrespective of the Vaccination status of the individuals”, ECDC concluded.

    >>> In Such a Context, "a Document issued under the authority and aegis of EU would presumably be Perceived as ... trustworthy by much of the Population, who may Give it Greater Significance .... This could Lead to an unwitting Increase in Risky Behaviour by holders of Covid Passes, providers of, f.ex., Tourism services, and public Authorities in travel-destination countries, with potentially DEVASTATING Consequences",  CoE's Report Warned.

 That's, apparently, the reason for which the Most Controversial "Vaccines"-using European Country : the UK, has recently faced an UnExpected Boost of Infections, to the point that Medical Authorities have Warned of a Risk for People Waiting to find a bed in a Hospital to pass from 5,3 Millions to more than 13 Millions "in the coming Months" ! (Partly UPDATED). Similar Problems of Recent Virus' Spread "Boom" also Elsewhere, when such Controversial Vaccinations went on, as, f.ex. from Sheychelles up to the Netherlands, with a Sudden "Jump" from 500 to 7.000 Infections in just 1 Week !

uk_1st_euro_fake_vaccined__infections_rebound_july_2021__who__eurofora_400

________________________

    => Therefore, CoE's Assembly Resolution "Calls" on its 47 Member States, First of all, to "Continue implementing the Full range of Public Health Measures Needed to bring Covid-19 under Control".

Indeed, f.ex. China and Australia, etc., who have Focused, Not on Controversial Pseudo-"Vaccines", But, Mainly on Public Health (Non-Pharmaceutical) Measures, have Astonishingly well Succeeded, (Already Since 2020, When any "Vaccine" had Not Yet been Authorized anywhere), to almost Eradicate Both Infections and Deaths, whose Numbers have, since, miraculously Fallen to about Zero or just 1 or 2...

china_eradicated_most_virus_20202021_who__eurofora_400

+

 virus_australia_infections_data_2020__2021_who__eurofora_400

virus_australia_deaths_data_2020__2021_who__eurofora_400

-----------------------------------------

    + "Covid Pass regimes" must Not be "instituted" But "Only When clear and well-established Scientific Evidence exists that such regimes Lower the Risk of Transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus", (i.e. Not Yet. For that purpose, States Must "take into Account of the Latest Evidence and Expert advise".

     ++ At any case, States must "Avoid Discrimination", particularly by Ensuring that "the extent to which the holders of different categories of Covid pass are Exempted from Restrictions is consistent with the extent to which the Risk of their Transmitting the SARS-CoV-2 virus is reduced", (If and When this Might, Perhaps, be Scientificaly Proved).

    +++ In particular, they Must "take due Account of ... the Relative Effectiveness of Different Vaccines and vaccination regimes, in Preventing Transmission of SARS-CoV-2". Something which, at least for the Time being, has  Not Yet been realy Proven in the case of Novel RNA Fake-"Vaccines", as f.ex. that of the Turkish-USA/Pfizer, of the Amenian-USA Moderna, etc.

Indeed, Recent News, f.ex. from Canada, Israel, and Greece, etc., Denounce a Diminished Protection for the Recipients, reportedly Falling Down to about 75% or Even 64%, particularly on Virus' variant Delta, While Virus' Infection Clusters in Israel and Greece were found to Contain around 45% or 55% of so-called "Vaccinated" Individuals ! - UPDATED).

 On the Contrary, f.ex., among others, Hungary, which Notoriously decided to use Many and Various Vaccines, withOut being Limited Only to those Few and Controversial Genetic Tools Authorised by EU's EMA Bureaucrats, (such as Turkish-USA Pfizer, USA-Moderna, UK's Astrozeneka, USA-Johnson), But Adding also Russian, Chinese, etc., as well as Drastic Public Health (Non-Pharmaceutical) Measures, apparently Succeeded, Recently, to Sharply Reduce, almost make Disappear, Both Infections and Deaths, according to WHO's Official Data... +Something Similar, reportedly goes Also for San Marino, which would have just Won against the Virus, and ReStarts its Economy Nowadays.

virus_hungary_2021_crushed_the_virus_since_various_vacc._who__eurofora_400

 

virus_infections__san_marino_as_hungary_various_vaccines__ok_who__eurofora_400 

---------------------------------------

      ++++ CoE also Denounced "TRANSMISSION RISKS involved in different Activities that might be Permitted for holders of Covid Passes, especially where they may come into Contact with people who have not acquired immunity through vaccination or prior infection and whether those people are at a higher Risk of severe illness or death from the illness".

 

    **** Most Important : Considering "the situation of those who for Medical reasons cannot, Or, for reasons of personal Opinion or Belief, Decline to be Vaccinated", "any system of Covid Pass must NOT become tantamount to COERCION and make VACCINATION COMPULSORY", CoE's PanEuropean Human Rights Organisation clearly EXCLUDES, in Conclusion. (Comp. also Supra).

 

(.../...)

 

("Draft-News")

 

--------------------------------

 

Multi-lingual Interface

Statistics

Visitors: 45074780

Archive

Login Form





Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

 sarko_merkel_mieux

The official presentation of a "Program" respecting People's choices voted in the June 7, 2009 EU Elections, to be debated in EU Council and EU Parliament during its 1st Session on July in Strasbourg, is the No 1 Priority, according to Democratic principles, for the Franco-German axis, said the main winners at the ballot box, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angie Merkel.

They stressed  that the New EU Commission's President must have a "Program" in favor of an EU which "protects" its Citizens, regulates financial markets and aims at a "Political" Europe" : a wording they have used as incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid.

They also declared ready for a "political" endorsment of "Mr. Barroso's candidacy" in June's EU Council, considering that an official decision would have to be made after EU Parliament's debates and votes, possibly from next month (July), with the legally necessary final acceptance shortly after Lisbon Treaty's entry into force, hoped for September or October.


- "A Program, and Mr. Barroso" : This resumes, in substance, the anouncements made by Sarkozy and Merkel, on the question of current EU Commission's President, Barroso's declared wish to succeed to himself for a second mandate, to be extended during the following 5 years.

 In their 1st meeting after EU Elections, they observed that "the Franco-German axis counted in European Elections' campaign... But, we both keep a realistic view : We saw the number of those who abstained, and we must absolutely give them an answer. We also see the disilusionment of an important number of Europeans vis a vis Europe, and we are aware of the responsibilities we have".

sarko

 - The "Duty" of the new EU Commission's President, after June 7, 2009 EU Elections' result, "is to act for a Europe which protects the Europeans, to commit himself into working for a better Regulation of Financial transactions, ... and to have a Political will for Europe", underlined Sarkozy.

Therefore, "we have asked M. Barroso... to clarify, to officialy present the intentions he has", he anounced.

- "We want to speak also about the Programme", explained Merkel.

- "It's important that for the next EU Parliament's mandate (2009-2014) we take the right Decisions for Europe.  Obviously on Persons, but mainly Decisions on Issues", she stressed.

- "It's not simply a question of a Person, it's also a question of a Programme". We are "really asking Mr. Barroso to commit himself on a Program, and on Principles, on Values", Sarkozy added.

EU President-in-office, Czech Prime Minister Jan Fischer, accepted the Franco-German stance :

- "Barroso must present his Programme. The Czech Presidency agrees with that", Fischer reportedly said later, after meeting Sarkozy.

But Press reports from Brussels claimed that Barroso had preferred to be officially appointed by EU Council since June, (i.e. next week), "because this was implied by the current Treaty of Nice, according to him", and considered any delay until the possible ratification of the new, Lisbon Treaty on September/October, as "undemocratic".

- "At any case, independently of what Germany and France ask, it's also EU Parliament's wish". "We shall propose Mr Barroso's candidacy... But even in the framework of Nice Treaty, EU Parliament has to be associated in this Decision", the French President observed.

If this is correctly done, then "we support Mr. Barroso's candidature", and "if the (EU) Parliament agrees, we might ratify this decision since July", (i.e. next month), they both said.

smerkem_400

- "France and Germany support Baroso's candidacy, But we want to speak also on the Program. We believe that this Program should be established in close cooperation with EU Parliament, and that's why we have followed an appropriate way", said Merkel.  - If EU Parliament wants, this election can take place on July,  but this must be done in full agreement.

- "We shall support Mr. Barroso's candidacy, without doubt", said Sarkozy. "But we have asked from Mr. Barroso, as I told him yesterday, to put into detail.. his intentions, at the eve of his 2nd mandate, if the situation avails itself.


    France and Germany "don't want to take an Official Legal Decision by writting" during "the next (EU) Council" (on June 18-19), declared Sarkozy.  Because they prefer, at this stage, only "a Political decision" on June, "so that we (EU Council) can work together with EU Parliament", which starts to meet only Next Month, since July in Srasbourg, "leaving a Legal decision by writting for later".

    - "If the Conditions are fuillfiled in EU Parliament, we (EU Council) are ready to give the agreement and make it offficial", said Merkel

    - "But, now we are working in the base of Nice Treaty. If tommorow we want to work in the spirit of Lisbon Treaty, we have to find a proper way", she added.

    - "Of course it's Legally complicated, because we are going to make a Political proposal to the forthcoming Council, for an EU Commission's President, on the basis of Nice Treaty : So, we (EU Council) will not appoint the Commissioners. Only the President.  If EU Parliament agrees, it could endorse this position on July", explained Sarkozy.

    But, on Autumn, "if Ireland ratifies Lisbon Treaty, there will be, at any case, a 2nd Decision, to appoint the Commission's President, this time on the basis of Lisbon treaty, and then, we, the EU Member States, would have to appoint (also) the EU Commissioners", he added.

    As for the precise Timing :  - "Everything is suspended until the Irish vote... Now, we must all make everything possible to help Ireland to say "Yes"" to Lisbon Treaty... The Irish Referendum, ..will take place either on September or on October. It's a Question which depends on the Irish. And,  then, we shall have the Choice of the Candidates for the permanent Institutions of Europe".

    However, "if Ireland says No, we, French and Germans, have to assume our responsibilities, and we'll do so", he concluded.

    But British and Swedish governments were reportedly eager to have a final EU Council decision on Barroso since this month, on June's European Council. While the other EU Member Countries are divided, several of them preferring to wait until EU Parliament pronounces itself, on July, and/or until Lisbon Treaty might be ratified by Ireland at the beginning of the Autumn. Barroso's current mandate ends on November.

    There are also various, contradictory and/or unpredictable reactions inside EU Parliament vis a vis Barroso's wish to continue a 2nd mandate, because many MEPs are openly or secretly opposed, reluctant, or hesitating.

    In the biggest EU Countries, as France and Germany, EU Citizens voted on June 2009 EU Elections for a renovated, non-technocratic but Political Europe which cares for its Citizens, with an Identity, Values and Borders, declared incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid, by mainstream, pro-European Governing Parties. Similar choices were also supported in several other small or medium EU Countries.

    On the contrary, whenever, in other Countries, Governing and other mainstream Parties didn't make these choices or eluded them, EU Citizens massively voted for euro-Sceptics whenever they were the only ones to to promise anti-bureacratic change and oppose Turkey's demand to enter into the EU, (f.ex. in the UK, Netherlands, etc).

    It's seems to be an Open Question whether Sarkozy and Merkel's conditions will be really accepted by Barroso, who was appointed on 2004 in a different political context, (with Socialist Prime Ministers in Germany, France, etc), had rejected in the Past the idea of EU becoming "equal to the USA" as "ridiculous", and pushed for Turkey's contoversial EU bid, trying to "soften" or contain the changes desired by the People who voted for Merkel and Sarkozy with another policy vis a vis Turkey on 2005 in Germany and on 2007 in France, as they did all over Europe on 2009.

    In addition to many EPP Governments, it's 3 remaining Socialist Prime Ministers : Gordon Brown in the UK, Zapatero in Spain, and Socrates in Prortugal, who support Barroso, as well as Liberal Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt. But their Parties lost the June 2009 EU Elections.

    Questioned whether there was still "Time" for "other" possible "Candidates", Sarkozy and Merkel did not deny, nor made any comment on that, but simply said that "it's not for us to make publicity for any candidates. We anounced our choice ("A Program, and Mr. Barroso"). But we respect any other candidate".

    Among various other names cited are former Belgian Prime Minister Verhofstadt, former UNO's Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson of Ireland, Italian former EU Commission's vice-President Monti, etc. Meanwhile, Luxembourg's PM Juncker, (who had been unanimously accepted by EU Council for EU Commission's Presidency on 2004, but refused), announced his intention to resign from "EuroGroup"'s Chair. Thus, he might be available for another Top EU job.

    As "EuroFora"'s "opinion" said (See publication dated 9/6/09) : - "If the current candidates (i.e. Barroso, etc) to the Top EU jobs promise and guarantee to respect People's democratic choices, then, it's OK".

"Otherwise, Europe must find new candidates, really motivated and able to implement these democratic choices of the People."

    Because, "in Democracy, the forthcoming choices for EU's Top Jobs,...should be made according to EU Citizens' Votes in June 7, 2009 European Elections, and main EU Governments' strategic policies".
        

***

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Results

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.