The War against The People has reached new heights in the past weeks and days. The globalists moved to the next stages of their lock-step scenario, the modern yellow star renamed ‘vaccine passports’, or ‘green passes’ (using a color that can speak to moronic zombies who think that submitting to every humiliation will stop the bullying).
While the experimental injections posing as ‘vaccines’ are killing and harming on a scale never seen before, the corrupt political puppets in the West are now implementing the surveillance and control tools the fake ‘pandemic’ has been created for.
Let’s first have a look at the deadly experimental injection weekly updates:
Update 16 of April from the CDC VAERS Adverse Events Reporting System
In case there are still doubts about the experimental nature of these products, here are some facts:
This study shows that the Pfizer SARS-COV-2 mRNA treatment posing as a ‘vaccine’ is in experimental phase or rather in trial phase. The normal trial phases should have been done for years on animals and volunteers aware of being used as guinea pigs. Instead they are tested live on human beings who, for the vast majority have not a clue that they are used as guinea pigs by criminal pharmaceutical companies and their partners in crime in governments.
Of course, the mainstream media (who takes most of their advertising revenue from big pharma) are lying to the public pretending that the experimental ‘vaccines’ have been ‘approved’ (not true, they were ‘authorized for emergency’), and that they are ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ (another lie as these products are killing and harming people on an unprecedented scale).
This is an excerpt from the UK government MHRA showing that these injections were never approved but ‘temporarily authorised’. The same is true for the USA and Europe. People are getting injected by hazardous substances posing as ‘vaccines’ that have been ‘authorized for emergency’ by so-called regulators in bed with Big Pharma…
Details here (for some reasons, Moderna adverse events weren’t accessible on the ‘Yellow Card” system of the UK government).
Update 17.04.2021 – from the ‘European’ database of ‘suspected’ drug adverse reactions, ‘Eudravigilance‘…
The EMA (European Medicines Agency, a ‘regulator’ controlled by Big Pharma) have an adverse reactions reporting system called ‘Eudravigilance’.
SAME CONCOCTIONS, SAME EXPERIMENT ON DISINFORMED OR OUTRIGHT BRAINWASHED POPULATIONS, SAME RESULTS.
VERY SAFE AND EFFECTIVE INDEED!
YOU HAVE MORE CHANCE TO DIE FROM THEIR EXPERIMENTAL SHOTS POSING AS VACCINES THAN WITH THEIR ALLEDGED ‘KILLER VIRUS’ !
And of course, people injected by hazardous mRNA products don’t even know what the consequences will be in the medium and long term, from being injected with the disease they were supposed to cure to trigger new ones resistant to current treatments (so they can keep selling ‘vaccines’ forever for diseases they created in the first place), to DNA modification and natural immune systems destruction (so that people can become ‘customers for life’ of the pharmaceutical mafia), to totally unpredicatble outcomes from experimental, and poorly tested substances posing as ‘vaccines’.
The goal is and has always been control and greed.
The ordinary hard working people of the United Kingdom have been played (and not only them but all other countries).
They have been manipulated and coerced into complying with medical fascism, thanks to the psychological warfare unleashed by the UK Government and its Scientific advisors every waking hour since March 2020.
The authorities weapons have included the television, the radio, the newspapers. But their most important weapon in ensuring the general public have complied with dictatorial tyranny and offered themselves up as lab rats in the largest experiment to ever be conducted in human history, is a weapon that everyone reading this will know personally.
Because that weapon has been you.
Extraordinary article from the Daily Expose exposing the social engineering and psychological techniques used by the criminal UK ‘government’ to impose medical fascism in the UK. The same state sterror techniques have been used everywhere since March 2020 and are still used today to push the ‘vaccine passport’ agenda.
They managed to get hold of these documents describing how the criminal UK government used psychological warfare, state/media terrorism and behavorial techniques to manipulate the public:
All the ‘covid’ operation is based on perception, manipulation, terror and lies, there was never any ‘pandemic’ or rather, there is as much ‘pandemic’ as there were ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in Irak!
A clinical scientist and immunologist-virologist at a southern California laboratory says he and colleagues from 7 universities are suing the CDC for massive fraud. The reason: not one of 1500 samples of people tested “positive” could find Covid-19. ALL people were simply found to have Influenza A, and to a lesser extent Influenza B. This is consistent with the previous findings of other scientists.
Dr. Derek Knauss: “When my lab team and I subjected the 1500 supposedly positive Covid-19 samples to Koch’s postulates and put them under an SEM (electron microscope), we found NO Covid in all 1500 samples. We found that all 1500 samples were primarily Influenza A, and some Influenza B, but no cases of Covid. We did not use the bulls*** PCR test.’
At 7 universities not once COVID detected
‘When we sent the rest of the samples to Stanford, Cornell, and a couple of the labs at the University of California, they came up with the same result: NO COVID. They found Influenza A and B.
Then we all asked the CDC for viable samples of Covid. The CDC said they can’t give them, because they don’t have those samples.’
‘So we came to the hard conclusion through all our research and lab work that Covid-19 was imaginary and fictitious.
The flu was only called ‘Covid,’ and most of the 225,000 deaths were from co-morbidities such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, pulmonary emphysema, etc.. They got the flu which further weakened their immune systems, and they died.’
The lockdown, the economic destruction, the masking, the distancing, the killing of human intereaction, the so-called ‘vaccines’, the ‘vaccine passports’, all of this is a gigantic social engineering and psychological warfare operation directed against us, against mankind, by a tiny minority of extremely rich psychopaths and their puppets in governments and institutions.
WE ARE AT WAR, YES! BUT NOT THE FAKE WAR THEY PRETEND TO FIGHT, THERE IS NO PANDEMIC, NEVER WAS ANY. THE WAR IS A WORLD WAR, A WAR FOR THE CONTROL OF THE PLANET, OF OUR MINDS AND BODIES, A WAR FOR THE CONTROL OF HUMANITY.
WE ARE THE TARGETS.
AND IF WE DON;T FIGHT BACK WITH ALL WHAT WE HAVE IN US, THEY WILL CRUSH US, THEY WILL ENSLAVE US AND THEY WILL TAKE EVERYHTING FROM US!
When are people going to say enough is enough?!
In Europe, the ‘EU commission’ (the exact equivalence of the politburo in the old USSR) has moved with their puppetmasters agenda: the ‘vaccine passports’, so-called ‘green passes’ (now that Israel has become a complete fascist and rogue state and almost nobody said anything against it, the other globalist puppets think they can impose the same diktats everywhere).
Not only that, but the same totally rotten EU commission has also decided on its own (an unelected and unnacoutable body) to ‘amend’ EU laws by ‘proposing’ (aka imposing) a ‘Passenger Locator Form’!
This article from CHD describes what was going on this week in the utmost absence of coverage from any other media so that a new fascist rule can be imposed from above without any deamocratic scrutiny and debate:
Over 12000 Already Rejected The Passenger Locator Form! TAKE ACTION
The EU Commission has proposed an amendment to European law creating a ‘Passenger Locator Form’. The amendment procedure, which affects Decision (EU) 2017/253, allows the Commission to bypass the European Parliament.
A procedure of this kind would normally be employed to amend technical details in the law.
However the PLF represents a significant intrusion in the privacy of EU Citizens and a security threat to their personal data. The PLF amendment, in conjunction with the proposed European vaccination card, euphemistically dubbed the Digital Green Certificate, will give the EU the power to closely surveil its citizens in the manner of a police state. It’s no surprise that the Commission is keen to avoid Parliamentary scrutiny of the Proposal.
Until midnight ‘European citizens’ (THERE ARE NO EUROPEAN CITIZENS, EUROPE IS A CONTINENT FAR WIDER THAN THE ‘EU’, IT’S NOT A COUNTRY OR NATION, THERE ARE GERMAN, ITALIAN, FRENCH CITIZENS, BUT NO ONE IN EUROPE IS A ‘EUROPEAN CITIZEN’), will be able to comment on the Proposal (it was until the 21st of April, too late of course to react as usual).
in accordance with the Better Regulation rules (rules that nobody or very few in the EU have ever heard of), here.
So far over 12000 citizens have written comments to let the EU know that they want no restriction on their movement, and that ‘my location is private’. This comes as a reminder to the Institutions that #FreedomNeedsNoPass.
From the same source:
Sign up this petition accessible here (from CHD ‘s website) which specifically calls for the European vaccination certificate which is about to be introduced to be prevented.
“The effectiveness and protective time span of the Corona vaccines is not yet assured. Additionally, there are issues with ethic aspects and privacy. Now, even the WHO states that it rejects this idea.
Highest ethical value have the rights to the integrity of the person and to equality between people, vaccinated or not, which are part of the EU Charter.
These are at risk due to the vaccination being an option to get back single fundamental rights at least for an unknown period of time. Free decision about vaccination is being manipulated like this and kind of discrimination is being established.
As the vaccination certificate shall be digital, there is in general a possibility of theft of personal medical data.
Additionally, not only service providers like travel agencies get your vaccination status but also indirectly e.g. employers, in case employees are not allowed to travel abroad by plane.”
I THINK WE LALL KNOW THAT THIS KIND OF PETITION, ALTHOUGH NECESSARY, IS NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY REAL IMPACT.
HOWEVER THIS MIGHT HAVE A BETTER IMPACT:
The MEPS’s are mainly sollicited by the + 50 000 lobbies polluting the corridors of the EU institutions from brussels to Luxembourg and Strasbourg. They aren’t used to receive calls or emails from real citizens, so it’s the occasion to tell them what we want and that we have the names of those who voted YES to ‘vaccine passports’ and that we won’t forget them.
Here is everything you need for you to lobby your legislator.
This file will allow you to search all the Members of the European Parliament by country, expert committee, and you can even find if they voted for or against the accelerated procedure of the so-called “Green Pass“.
Click on any name and will can also find their phone details if you scroll at the end of their profile page.
MEPs Contact details – Click here to download the dynamic List of MEPs:
Try this list of MEPs on social media, such as their Facebook & Twitter accounts as well. Make yourself known. Twitter is a powerful way to reach legislators in real-time.
Make your voice heard, a voice for the children of Europe! Let them know what we want: good health and freedom.
GOOD INITIATIVE , THIS IS THE LEAST WE CAN DO.
Strangely enough, the two biggest countries Germany and France (by population’s size) have voted no in their majority to the new ‘yellow badges’ scheme. The smallest countries and those with big tourism industries have voted yes in their majorities. the most surprising is that former vassals of the USSR who had to suffer decades of communist dictatorship after having been invaded by the mazi armies are voting for the ‘vaccine passport’ agenda… MEP’s from Poland, Hungary and others Central and Eastern former communist countries voted for the renewal of dictatorial surveillance systems, apartheid, discrimination and destruction of privacy for their constituents. Hav ethye learne dnothing after almost 70 years under bolshevik boots? Are they that corrupt and vile?
The question we ask is : Will these ‘vaccine passport’ rules apply to diplomats (MEPS’s, EU ‘kommisars and all the other bureaucrats)? We think it won’t as diplomats are amongst the few allowed to live a normal life while we are told to stay in house arrest, wear muzzles, not to travel and have our livelihood destroyed while our taxes pay their fat wages!
MEPs Contact details – Click here to download the dynamic List of MEPs
ALL THE NAMES ARE THERE, THOSE WHO VOTED NO AND THOSE WHO VOTED YES TO ‘VACCINE PASSPORTS’… AND CONTACT DETAILS, EMAILS, SOCIAL MEDIA AND PHONES.
GIVE THEM A CALL, SEND AN EMAIL, ASK THEM TO SAY NO TO THE SINISTER ‘VACCINE PASSPORT’ PLANS, AND IF THEY DON’T TELL THEM WHAT YOU THINK OF THEM! TELL THEM THAT WE WON’T FORGET THEIR NAMES AND THE EVIL THEY DID TO US!
There are, however, a minority of defenders of freedom, democracy and the truth in the EU parliament. During the last vote 202 voted NO to the ‘vaccine passport’ agenda. This is roughly a third of the total 703 MEP’s.
Croatian MEP Ivan Vilibor Sincic says the EU has been ‘acting blindly. He questions the European Parliament about the measures and policy followed by the European Union during the Covid-19 crisis
And then MEP Rob Rooken:
The European Commission has proposed a new system of border controls forcing European travellers to carry a vaccine card, euphemistically dubbed the ‘Digital Green Certificate’.
Those behind the Proposal for the ‘universal framework’ intended to pass the law with as little debate as possible, despite the brave efforts of some politicians including Croatian MEP Ivan Vilibor Sincic. They said it was urgent.
Unfortunately for her (UNELECTED) “leaders”, Europe did not agree, and now a Dutch amendment for its rejection is on the table.
This comes after weeks of discontent from voters. Every day for the last month, MEPs have received thousands of emails in a constant stream from impassioned Citizens, unwilling to give up their rights to freedom of movement and bodily integrity.
The message from European voters was clear: freedom needs no pass, but the people need freedom.
In fact, the Institutions have been losing ground for some time. First, the USA ruled out a vaccination card on 6 April.
Less than two weeks later, the WHO asked that any plans for making proof of vaccination a condition of entry be abandoned because of the unavoidably discriminatory consequences. (TRUE, EVEN THE CORRUPT WHO IS AGAINST IT).
Then a group of Belgian lawyers and scientists, following a detailed analysis, pronounced the Proposal “disproportionate, inefficient and unfair obstacle to the free movement of European citizens”, in particular given the inaccuracy of the underlying science.
Finally, on 19 April Mr Robert F Kennedy Jr. wrote to MEPs urging rejection of the Proposal.
In agreement with the Belgian group, Kennedy found the Commission’s assertion that introducing restrictions on free movement would somehow facilitate the exercise of that same right quite simply absurd.
Now the EU is backtracking. Facing a strong, united opposition, and internal disagreement between the Member States, the Institutions have granted themselves more time to amend the Proposal. What they do not realise is that European Citizens are way ahead of them: the people’s amendment has already arrived.
On Wednesday, an amendment from Dutch MEP Rob Rooken, rejecting the Proposal in its entirety (also below), was signed by 36 other MEPs.
The Rooken Amendment is ready to be tabled at the next Plenary Session and catches the Establishment on the backfoot. Not only have both the USA and WHO ruled out the use of vaccine cards, but more and more Europeans have begun to realise that no proof that vaccination stops the virus from spreading exists, and that the new controls would cause discrimination across the Union.
So Europe, tell your MEP: Support the Rooken Amendment. Reject the Green Pass. Tell them that the USA did it, the WHO did it, and now it’s Europe’s turn. Tell them it’s time to #rookandroll !
Mr Rob Rooken MEP’s letter to fellow Parliamentarians:
Next week we will vote on the Commission proposal of the Digital Green Certificate.
I would like to table an amendment to reject this Commission proposal in its entirety, with the following justification:
- The proposed legislation infringes on fundamental human rights,
- including freedom of movement,
- respect of private life,
- protection of personal data
- and equality before the law.
- It also results in discrimination against those who have not had the opportunity or do not wish to be vaccinated or to be tested.
- Moreover, it does not guarantee data privacy protection.
- Sharing of personal and medical data should never be compulsory and storing of this confidential information is not necessary.
- Furthermore, it will most likely be used for other purposes besides restricting the freedom of movement
- and it poses a risk to become permanent since it will be applicable to any variant of SARS-CoV-2 and similar infectious diseases with epidemic potential.
- The Commission has also not conducted an impact assessment.
- The regulation has such far-reaching implications for fundamental rights, that an impact assessment cannot be omitted in light of an urgency.
- Finally, this regulation is not necessary to ensure the freedom of movement.
- Presenting the results of a negative PCR-test before cross border travel is sufficient.
If you wish to co-sign this rejection amendment (signatures of 36 MEPs needed), please sign the attached document and send it back to me. Deadline: Wednesday 21/4 at 12:00.
Analysis of the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable certificates on vaccination, testing and recovery to ‘facilitate free movement’ during the COVID-19 pandemic (digital green certificate) (if adopted, no doubt it will stay forever like every so-called ‘temporary measure’).
The proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the introduction of a digital green certificate is, on the one hand, disproportionate insofar as it adds obstacles to the free movement of European citizens and, on the other hand, inefficient because the measures it puts in place do not guarantee the public health objectives (preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2) which constitute its justification.
In addition to the fact that the basic premise of the digital green certificate is based on inaccurate and incomplete scientific claims, the proposal, as it stands, violates the fundamental rights of European citizens, in particular the right to free movement within the EU and the right to the protection of personal data.
The European Commission has formulated a proposal for a European Regulation on the issuance of a digital green certificate to facilitate the free movement of persons within the European Union during the Covid-19 pandemic. Through this certificate, the Commission pursues, according to its own words, a double objective: on the one hand, to facilitate the free movement of European citizens within the European Union and, on the other hand, to pursue the public health objective of preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Today, when EU citizens wish to travel to another Member State, they face multiple restrictions and requirements imposed by Member States, with significant differences depending on the Member State of destination. With its proposal for a Regulation, the Commission wishes to coordinate national initiatives that restrict the free movement of persons in order to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
In order to achieve this double objective, the Commission foresees the requirement of a vaccination certificate or, alternatively, a negative test result for SARS-CoV-2 infection (PCR test or antigenic test) or a certificate of recovery from a previous infection.
Our analysis concluded that the proposed Regulation is neither scientifically nor legally convincing.
Firstly, from a scientific perspective none of the three certificates can guarantee that the risk of transmitting SARS-CoV-2 has been eliminated. With regard to the vaccination certificate, the assumption in Article 5 of the proposal – that (all) COVID- 19 vaccines would limit the spread of the virus – is inaccurate and incomplete and not based on scientific evidence.
More fundamentally, this demonstrates that, given the current state of science, the very principle of a vaccination certificate is problematic and discriminatory.
This problematic nature has been recognised by the WHO, which does not support the introduction of vaccine passports. For the same reasons, several US States have rejected the principle of vaccine passports and the US federal government has announced that it will not issue vaccine passports.
The alternatives envisaged by the proposed Regulation (negative test certificate and certificate of recovery) do not offer any further guarantee against infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
On the one hand, negative test certificates merely offer a snapshot of a situation that may already be different a few hours later.
A person who tests negative could well be infected and become contagious the day after the test. Furthermore, carrying out PCR tests without taking into account the pre-test probability results in a large number of false positives.
An uninfected person could be prevented from travelling on the grounds that the PCR test gives a positive result, merely because that h person’s body has not yet eliminated all the RNA fragments from an earlier infection. On the other hand, the certificate of recovery does not guarantee that re-infection has not taken place bringing with it the risk of transmission. Nor does the certificate of recovery take into account the fact that immunity gained from a previous infection may go undetected.
None of the alternatives envisaged can therefore guarantee the public health objective of no transmission of SARS-CoV-2. On the other hand, these different certificates require administrative and medical steps that constitute an obstacle to free movement. The cost can, in some cases (PCR test, medical analysis, etc.), be significant, especially for family travel when the whole family must have a certificate (a PCR test costs about 50 euros for one person, for a family with two children, this represents a cost of 200 euros, which will certainly dissuade the less fortunate from travelling and will thus increase inequalities).
More fundamentally, the digital green certificate was presented as “the passport” that would give back the freedom to travel and circulate to European citizens.
This claim is contradicted by the text of the proposed Regulation itself, which allows host Member States to continue imposing additional restrictions on holders of the digital green certificate, or even to deny them entry in their territory.
Thus, a person in possession of a digital green certificate could still be subject to a testing requirement or quarantine after arrival in the country of destination.
It thus appears that, far from removing the obstacles to free movement which result in particular from the great diversity of national measures, the proposal for a Regulation adds new obstacles to free movement, while leaving the Member States the possibility of retaining those which already exist.
Furthermore, from a public health point of view, the digital green certificate is simply ineffective and therefore useless since, whatever form it takes (vaccination certificate, negative test certificate or certificate of recovery), it cannot guarantee the absence of risk of infection and therefore of transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
In legal terms, the proposed Regulation does not respect the applicable legal framework and violates several fundamental rights.
The proposed Regulation puts in place restrictions on the free movement of persons which are justified (even if scientifically questionable) on public health grounds.
However, such a restriction must pursue a legitimate objective and be proportionate and necessary to achieve the objective. Furthermore, it cannot violate the principle of non-discrimination. It appears that the proposal is discriminatory in several respects.
Firstly, there is discrimination between nationals of Member States where vaccination is free and nationals who have to be tested in countries where testing is not free.
Secondly, there is discrimination between people who are no longer infectious but who test positive and those who test negative (only the latter being able to cross borders freely).
Third, there is discrimination between residents of countries where a (more expensive, slower) PCR test will be required and residents of countries where an antigenic test will be considered sufficient.
Fourthly, there may also be discrimination between nationals of Member States in which certain vaccines are allowed and nationals of Member States, which do not allow the same vaccines. The restriction on free movement is not proportional either.
On the one hand, as mentioned above, given the current state of scientific knowledge, it is not possible to say that the restriction makes it possible to achieve, with a reasonable degree of certainty, the public health objective (non-transmission of SARS-CoV-2).
On the other hand, insofar as it will be applied massively and systematically to all EU residents, without distinction to the health situation in the country of origin and the health situation in the country of destination, it is clearly disproportionate.
A citizen travelling from a green zone to a red zone should therefore carry the digital green certificate, as should a citizen travelling from a red zone to a red zone.
Finally, the introduction of the digital green certificate is not time limited (no fixed term) and its scope can be extended to other “similar infectious diseases”, which clearly exceeds the requirements of proportionality and necessity.
The proposed Regulation is thus discriminatory (violation of Articles 20 and 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) and does not respect the principle of proportionality (violation of Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union).
Finally, the introduction of a digital green certificate also involves the processing of medical data, which are considered to be very sensitive data and whose processing is, with certain exceptions, prohibited (Article 9 of the General Data Protection Regulation).
The Commission invokes one of the exceptions enshrined in Article 9 to justify the processing and transmission of such data in the context of the introduction of the digital green certificate.
Here again, for the same reasons, it must be noted that the proposed processing is not proportional or necessary to achieve the objective. The proposed Regulation also violates Article 9 of the GDPR in that it does not provide for appropriate and specific measures to safeguard fundamental rights.
For example, the proposed Regulation does not contain any indication, nor any list in the annex, of the national authorities to which data on travellers’ health may be transmitted and who will have access to these data. Furthermore, it does not provide for any guarantee as to the risk of the use of medical data from the certificates by the Member States in the context of the national restrictions which, under Article 10, the host Member State could still impose on holders of the certificate.
The proposed Regulation violates Article 9 of the GDPR and thus Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 16 TFEU.
The full text of this analysis is also available here and on the website of the Association of ‘Notre Bon Droit’
Covid Rationnel is a Belgian think tank that advocates an interdisciplinary and rational scientific approach to the management of the covid-19 crisis.
Erik VAN DEN HAUTE (ULB, Law)
Raluca GHERGHINARU (lawyer)
Alice ASSELBERGHS (lawyer)
With the participation of:
Mélanie DECHAMPS (UCLouvain, Clinique Universitaire St Luc, Intensivist)
Denis FLANDRE (UCLouvain, nano- and bio-electronics)
Pierre-François LATERRE (UCLouvain, Clinique Universitaire St Luc, Intensivist)
Elisabeth PAUL (ULB, public health)
Bernard RENTIER (ULiège, virologist)
That is all very positive and good but, what we are seeing here is the continuation of the globalists agenda towards a global dictatorship (whatever they call it these days, ‘great reset’ or NWO), and too many people are simply oblivious, ignorant or intolerant of what is really taking place worldwide.
These articles tells everything anyone needs to know about the real agenda behind this SCAM ‘PANDEMIC’:
Macron, a former employee of the Rotschilds bank (actually he is still their employee as they had him installed as president with media and corrupt judges help and he is implementing their agenda) is ‘governing’ by fiat and decides as a dictator does what will be the next diktat on his ‘subjects’ (who, amazingly have done nothing or so little to fight the current medical fascist regime). This nobody, a bankers’ puppet says people should have a curfew at 7pm in spring (when sun sets at 9/10pm), tells people to stay at home or within 10 km of their homes and now imposes ‘vax certificates’ to travel from France oversea territories to France!
And nobody burns the Elysee Palace? Nobody uses the local ‘Prefet’ dickhead as a ftrial for a modern Guillotine? Not even a banger in the streets?
Even the Germans, with their reputation of being a very obedient and gregarious people (sheep) protest when their new ‘furher’ for life merkel decides to give herself full dictatorial powers over the various States that compose the Federal country of Germany.
Only Hitler did that! We know how it ended…
YES, HERE WE ARE, NAZISM IS BACK IN GERMANY, A NEW FORM OF NAZISM, A MIX BETWEEN THE WORST OF NAZISM AND MARXISM, SOMETHING BETWEEN THE USSR, NAZI GERMANY AND THE FORMER DDR (the real motherland of former communist Merkel). THIS NEW FORM OF NAZISM HAS A NAME, IT’S CALLED GLOBALISM.
THIS IS THE WAR THE GLOBALIST CULT HAS LAUNCHED AGAINST HUMANITY AND IT WILL STOP ONLY WHEN WE STOP THEM AND WHEN WE DESTROY THEIR IDEOLOGY AT ITS ROOTS.