NBA Won’t Force Vaccine on Elite Athletes, But Staff Will be Mandated to Get the Jab

In another example of how privileged people aren’t having to follow the same rules as everyone else, the NBA won’t force elite athletes to take the COVID-19 vaccine despite staff being mandated to get it.

Wealthy NBA stars have made themselves the latest exempted class after their union (the NBPA) “refused to budge on its demand that players not be required to take the vaccine.”

Around 100 million Americans will be forced to get jabbed if they want to keep their jobs after Biden’s executive order, but the 15 per cent of NBA players who remain unvaccinated will be left alone.

“Any proposal that mandates vaccination remains a “non-starter,” reports ESPN.

However, both referees and NBS staffers will be required to get vaccinated if they want to stay in a job.

The union is refusing to give ground despite the NBA previously announcing that by October 1 anyone who came within 15 feet of players would be required to vaccinated.

Keep reading

Leftists: Health Care Is A Human Right, Unless You’re Unvaccinated

The same people who spent the last decade telling you health care is a human right now want to be able to deny it to you.

As if it wasn’t enough to hound people without the COVID-19 shot out of their jobs, schools, and even effectively whole cities, pundits and even some doctors are now floating the idea of denying medical care to people based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

“Is it time to put those who are endangering public health by refusing vaccines on notice that if they need care they will go to the end of the line, behind the patients who acted responsibly?” asks the Washington Post in a totally-not-loaded-at-all question.

While the Post article doesn’t endorse refusing treatment to the unvaccinated as punishment per se, it leaves the door wide open for denial of health care in certain instances. “Patients should expect to be told that being tested and wearing a mask are conditions of receiving care,” it notes. “For non-urgent care in which sufficient advance notice is given, requiring vaccination as a condition of continued service might also be defensible.”

The author makes no secret of his bias either, proudly admitting, “It’s easy to feel anger — as I do — toward those who perversely promote unwarranted skepticism about the seriousness of coronavirus infection, as well as the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.”

“Taking vaccination status into account when deciding whether to treat a patient can be acceptable — sometimes,” waxes an NBC thinkpiece.

Alabama doctor Jason Valentine posted a photo of himself next to a sign bragging he would “no longer see patients that are not vaccinated against COVID-19.” To patients questioning the motive for his decision, Valentine says “I told them COVID is a miserable way to die and I can’t watch them die like that.”

Dr. Linda Marraccini of Miami took similar steps, informing her thousands of patients their patronage would be terminated if they failed to vaccinate against COVID-19 and blaming them for a “lack of selflessness.” Becker’s Hospital Review published her story under the conspicuous headline “One physician’s case for refusing to treat unvaccinated patients in person.”

An internal memo circulated to a group of Texas doctors acknowledged, “Many are understandably angry and frustrated with the unvaccinated” and instructed “Vaccine status … may be considered when making triage decisions as part of the physician’s assessment of each individual’s likelihood of survival.” After the news leaked, one of the doctors involved backtracked his story and insisted the memo was a “homework assignment.”

These commentators and physicians know they can’t (yet) make blanket assertions that those who haven’t received the COVID-19 shot should be flatly turned away from critical care, but they are nonetheless stealthily planting the conversation in the public mind.

Meanwhile, people like Jimmy Kimmel are getting away with it, as the late-night host mocked the unvaccinated and suggested they should be denied lifesaving treatment. “Vaccinated person having a heart attack? Yes, come right in, we’ll take care of you. Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo? Rest in peace, wheezy,” Kimmel needled, taking a dig at Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning drug which has been misleadingly mocked as a horse dewormer, despite the fact that it has been used as an antiparasitic for human patients for decades.

Others are “merely” suggesting the unvaccinated should pay more for their healthcare. “Americans have just about had it up to here with people who refuse COVID-19 vaccinations,” begins a Los Angeles Times column from Michael Hiltzik entitled “Should the unvaccinated pay more for healthcare? That’s an easy call.”

“Unvaccinated people could be held civilly or even criminally liable if it can be shown that their behavior brought harm to others” — i.e., infected them — reads one of Hiltzik’s suggestions. As an example, he cites the possibility of nursing home employees who aren’t vaccinated (but curiously doesn’t mention the policies of Democrat governors like New York’s Andrew Cuomo, who condemned thousands of residents to their deaths by forcing nursing homes to take infected COVID-19 patients).

In another suggestion, he cites economist Jonathan Meer’s take in MarketWatch: “Insurers, led by government programs, should declare that medically-able, eligible people who choose not to be vaccinated are responsible for the full financial cost of COVID-related hospitalizations.”

Keep reading

Sharyl Attkisson is compiling a running list of all covid vaccine injuries, harmful reactions

Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson is logging all known cases of Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” injury and death in a running list on her website.

Some of the latest updates include instances of CNS demyelination, functional neurological disorder, waning immunity, Bell’s palsy, antibody dependent enhancement (ADE), heart disorders, Guillain-Barre autoimmune paralysis, Graves’ disease and blood clots all stemming from the injections.

Despite claims by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that all Chinese Virus injections are “safe and effective,” Attkisson’s running list shows that this is hardly the case.

In fact, there appear to be far more Fauci Flu shot injuries and deaths logged in VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) than all other vaccines combined, making “Operation Warp Speed” injections among the most dangerous ever.

On Attkisson’s site, you can sort and review cases of injury and death based on safety concerns, the type of vaccine administered, and country. You can also review additional reading materials and studies about the jabs.

Keep reading

Narrative Nuked: Nearly Half Of ‘COVID Hospitalizations’ This Year Have Been Mild Or Asymptomatic Cases

A brand new study is calling into question how reliable and meaningful of a number of “patients hospitalized with Covid-19” in the U.S. is. 

Covid hospitalizations – the most common metric heard when discussing the seriousness of the pandemic – may not be nearly as meaningful of a number as many once thought. And don’t take it from us: The Atlantic published a stunning piece on Tuesday citing a new study that suggests “almost half of those hospitalized with COVID-19 have mild or asymptomatic cases”.

The Atlantic had formerly called Covid hospitalizations “the most reliable pandemic number,” last winter. Now, after a nationwide study of hospitalization records was release, the publication is walking back its fervor on that statement. 

Researchers from Harvard Medical School, Tufts Medical Center, and the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System took on the task of trying to figure out how serious Covid cases were in those hospitalized, and how many people counted as Covid hospitalizations were actually in the hospital for Covid, versus getting a Covid test after being admitted for something else. 

The study “analyzed the electronic records for nearly 50,000 COVID hospital admissions at the more than 100 VA hospitals across the country,” The Atlantic wrote. It “checked to see whether each patient required supplemental oxygen or had a blood oxygen level below 94 percent” in order to try and determine if cases met the NIH’s threshold for “severe COVID”. 

What the study found was that from March 2020 to January 2021, 36% of Covid cases in the hospital were mild or asymptomatic. From January 2021 to June 2021, during the Delta variant’s spread, that number rose all the way to 48%. For vaccinated hospital patients, the number rose to a stunning 57%.

Keep reading

TRUE CONSPIRACY: More than 96% of Lancet “scientists” who denied covid lab origin theory have direct ties to Wuhan

As you may recall from the early days of the plandemic, 27 “scientists” penned a letter published in The Lancet that claimed the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) did not originate in a Wuhan laboratory. Well, it turns out that 26 of these scientists have direct ties to the Chinese lab in question, making their claims entirely untrustworthy.

That letter, which was published on March 7, 2020, “strongly condemned conspiracy theories” related to the Chinese Virus that suggest it did not come about by chance from bat soup at a wet market. Chinese Germs, they insist, are a product of nature, not of genetic tampering.

This declaration was intended to be the end of the conversation, except for the fact that inquiring minds decided to look into the matter further. What they found is that almost all of the scientists in question have major conflicts of interest when it comes to telling the truth.

The Daily Telegraph discovered that 96 percent of the research team that authored the article for The Lancet have links to Chinese researchers or their colleagues or benefactors at the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), China’s only known level-four biosafety lab.

Keep reading

Australia admits it is banning ivermectin for COVID because it interferes with universal vaccine agenda

Why in the world would anyone want to ban a medicine that is listed as a WHO essential safe medicine, won the Nobel prize, and has turned around millions of people with COVID from death’s doorstep? The Australians have now let the cat out of the bag. The reason is because it works, and it will eradicate COVID, along with the agenda — from control to vaccination — that they have built upon its existence.

Last Friday, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) of Australia officially banned the prescribing of ivermectin for COVID-19 or any other use besides parasitic infections. One would think that a country that forged a policy of “zero COVID” would want to aggressively treat this virus with everything that has proven to work and actually achieve literal zero COVID, as the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh did with the use of ivermectin. But indeed, this is not about getting rid of COVID, but about perpetuating the control and cronyism harnessed through COVID.

The three reasons given for the TGA’s decision were as shocking as they were revealing. “Firstly, there are a number of significant public health risks associated with taking ivermectin,” begins the statement. If you stop reading at that point mid-sentence, you are likely wondering how a drug that was praised more than any other drug in recent decades and was used safely billions of times could suddenly cause such terrible problems. However, when you complete the sentence, you will understand what sort of “risk” they are referring to. Here is the full explanation:

“Firstly, there are a number of significant public health risks associated with taking ivermectin in an attempt to prevent COVID-19 infection rather than getting vaccinated. Individuals who believe that they are protected from infection by taking ivermectin may choose not to get tested or to seek medical care if they experience symptoms. Doing so has the potential to spread the risk of COVID-19 infection throughout the community.”

That’s it! That is the reason they not only oppose ivermectin here and in Australia, but oppose hydroxychloroquine, budesonide, fenofibrate, and any and all forms of preventive and outpatient treatment. Doctors have even told me they have had prescriptions blocked by pharmacists for antibiotics or prednisone, if they think they are being used for COVID. This is the most evident admission yet from the Australian government that it can’t afford to get rid of the virus with something so cheap because it will obviate the need for the vaccine … and the totalitarian agenda accompanying it.

Keep reading

The Masking of the Servant Class: Ugly COVID Images From the Met Gala Are Now Commonplace

From the start of the pandemic, political elites have been repeatedly caught exempting themselves from the restrictive rules they impose on the lives of those over whom they rule. Governorsmayorsministers and Speakers of the House have been filmed violating their own COVID protocols in order to dine with their closest lobbyist-friends, enjoy a coddled hair styling in chic salons, or unwind after signing new lockdown and quarantine orders by sneaking away for a weekend getaway with the family. The trend became so widespread that ABC News gathered all the examples under the headline “Elected officials slammed for hypocrisy for not following own COVID-19 advice,” while Business Insider in May updated the reporting with this: “14 prominent Democrats stand accused of hypocrisy for ignoring COVID-19 restrictions they’re urging their constituents to obey.”

Most of those transgressions were too flagrant to ignore and thus produced some degree of scandal and resentment for the political officials granting themselves such license. Dominant liberal culture is, if nothing else, fiercely rule-abiding: they get very upset when they see anyone defying decrees from authorities, even if the rule-breaker is the official who promulgated the directives for everyone else. Photos released last November of California Governor Gavin Newsom giggling maskless as he sat with other maskless state health officials celebrating the birthday of a powerful lobbyist — just one month after he told the public to “to keep your mask on in between bites” and while severe state-imposed restrictions were in place regarding leaving one’s home — caused a drop in popularity and helped fueled a recall initiative against him. Newsom and these other officials broke their own rules, and even among liberals who venerate their leaders as celebrities, rule-breaking is frowned upon.

But as is so often the case, the most disturbing aspects of elite behavior are found not in what they have prohibited but rather in what they have decided is permissible. When it comes to mask mandates, it is now commonplace to see two distinct classes of people: those who remain maskless as they are served, and those they employ as their servants who must have their faces covered at all times. Prior to the COVID pandemic, it was difficult to imagine how the enormous chasm between the lives of cultural and political elites and everyone else could be made any larger, yet the pandemic generated a new form of crude cultural segregation: a series of protocols which ensure that maskless elites need not ever cast eyes upon the faces of their servant class.

Keep reading