Thursday 19 November 2020

Are the Canadians preparing to chop off the heads of dissidents??

Hal Turner has come up with the following:


The government of Canada has released a "Tender" requesting pricing and availability of Programmable Hydraulic Guillotines "for COVID-19 Response."  The actual government tender appears below.

Guillotines are used to behead people. Period.  So why is Canada ordering them?  Simple.  They are going to DESTROY the Canadian economy with their bogus COVID-19 lock-downs.  When Canadians are flat broke from not working,  when their family-owned businesses are wrecked financially and must close, when people have expended all their savings, and have exhausted all their credit, the government will come in and offer 100% Debt Relief, but with strings attached.

Those who agree, will go free.  Those who refuse will be isolated in camps, offered to take the deal one last time and, if they refuse, they will be slaughtered.

This story began back on October 14, when this web site published an email we received from an elected member of the Canadian Parliament, warning that his Liberal Party was instructed by the Prime Minister's Office to begin laying the groundwork to change Canada forever with a "Universal Basic Income" and 100% Debt Relief, on condition each citizen Forfeits the right to own property or assets, forever.  In other words . . . Communism!

There is a meme (which seems to originate with Celeste Solum) that goes something like this:

As Canada implements the shift to a "Universal Basic Income" and the successful, freedom-loving refuse to enter that system, THOSE PEOPLE will be grabbed-up and put into camps.

It will go like this:

One day, you'll be up eating breakfast in your house and you'll see or hear some police or ambulance sirens pulling up to a nearby neighbor's home.  The neighbor will be one of those successful, freedom-loving people.   Within seconds, you'll hear yelling or screaming as police drag the occupants out of the house.

Maybe you'll go outside and ask "Hey, what's going on here?  What are you doing?"

The cops will reply "These people have COVID-19 and they're being taken into Quarantine."  You''ll think, gee, that's a shame, and go back in your house, totally ignorant of what's ACTUALLY taking place.

Those folks aren't going into Quarantine, they're going into isolation camps.

In those camps, what the member of Parliament outline above will take place: The people will be told they have two choices: Either go into the Universal Basic Income system and forfeit their right to own personal property, or they get the guillotine.   

If they refuse to enter the communist system of Universal basic Income, their heads get chopped off.

https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/canada-buying-hydraulic-guillotines-for-covid-19-response-here-is-how-they-will-kill-you-for-refusing-their-new-universal-basic-income-system

Now, they have their "proof" - and it is one of the nuttiest things I have seen.




When I saw this I thought, "don't guillotines cut paper or sheet metal".  It took approximately 30 seconds to find my answer.


Should I disregard the whole notion because of an idiotic bit of non-proof?

Read the rest of the article HERE to make up your own mind.

I first encountered this notion here.

https://thecommonsenseshow.com/activism-agenda-21-conspiracy/whats-second-wave-kill-shot-coming-america-late-summer-celeste-solum-and-dave-hodges

If you ask me there is SOME of this that is coming true - but concentration camps?!

If you mean isolation centres in hotels that are under guard and which you can't leave then, yes, it's already happening.

But guillotines and executions?  I balk at the notion.

However, for all that we have this direct from the CDC:


CDC calls for “isolation camps” as part of a “Shielding Plan”.


The plan subjects U.S. Citizens and residents who are deemed “high risk” for Covid-19 to be forcibly removed from their families and homes, and involuntarily isolated in guarded Camps.

  • The public first got wind of this impending nightmare on May 4, 2020, when Governor Gavin Newson of California announced that the “army” – his word – will start with a deployment of 3,000 and grow to the 20,000 mark to chase down who, what, where, and with whom COVID positive people have had connections: “the tracing component requires workforce and to identify individuals who tested positive…to ID their contacts (with privacy) and maybe quarantine individuals to stop the spread of the disease.”

In a video, Robert Levin, MD Health Officer / Medical Director of Ventura County, California, elaborated with details about the state’s plans — which included the forcible removal of people from their homes and the establishment of mass community contact tracing..



Public outrage led Dr. Levin to retract his public statement and apologize, claiming his isolation plan was misunderstood.

  • While the mainstream media was silent, in August, Ohio governor Mike DeWine ordered the creation of FEMA isolation camps to quarantine • people who test positive for COVID-19 who do not require hospitalization but need isolation (including those discharged from hospitals) • people who have been exposed to COVID-19 who do not require hospitalization, and • Asymptomatic high-risk individuals needing social distancing as a precautionary measure. Elderly people and people with chronic medical conditions are considered “high risk”. [Before It’s NewsSGT Report]

 

“Northern California county Judge Sarah Heckman ordered Gov. Gavin Newsom to stop issuing directives related to the coronavirus that might interfere with state law. She barred him “from exercising any power under the California Emergency Services Act which amends, alters, or changes existing statutory law or makes new statutory law or legislative policy.”   Read the full order at this link from Suttercourts.com (PDF).

The US government CDC plan, issued on July 26, 2020, calls for “isolation camps”

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the “shielding approach” which “aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high risk”) and the general population.

“The shielding approach is intended to alleviate stress on the healthcare system and circumvent the negative economic consequences of long-term containment measures and lockdowns by protecting the most vulnerable.”

“While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings.”

  • Older adults and people with serious underlying medical conditions are deemed “high-risk individuals.” Their human and civil rights will be summarily set aside.

High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 

  • “They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.”

“…implementation of the shielding approach necessitates strict adherence 1,6,7, to protocol… strict adherence to infection, prevention and control (IPC) measures.”

CDC acknowledges that:

  • “This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings.
  • The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

In the absence of evidence to substantiate that older people pose a “high risk” for anyone, except, possibly for themselves these draconian isolation measures are an outrageous violation of personal autonomy the civil rights. It is an example of government overreach.

Neither older adults nor people with non-communicable chronic conditions pose any medical or public health threat to others. If their interaction with others poses a health risk for themselves, they have a right to decide what steps they need to take to protect themselves.

CDC further acknowledges the known serious risks of separation of families — including violence:

  • “Even with community involvement, there may be a risk of stigmatization.”11,12 

  • “Isolation/separation from family members, loss of freedom and personal interactions may require additional psychosocial support structures/ systems.”

  • “In addition to the risk of stigmatization and feeling of isolation, this shielding approach may have an important psychological impact and may lead to significant emotional distress, exacerbate existing mental illness or contribute to anxiety, depression, helplessness, grief, substance abuse, or thoughts of suicide among those who are separated or have been left behind.”

  • “Separating families and disrupting and deconstructing multigenerational households may have long-term negative consequences.

    “Shielding strategies need to consider sociocultural gender norms in order to adequately assess and address risks to individuals, particularly women and girls. Restrictive gender norms may be exacerbated by isolation strategies such as shielding. At the household level, isolating individuals and limiting their interaction, compounded with social and economic disruption has raised concerns of potential increased risk of partner violence.

  • “Households participating in house swaps or sector-wide cohorting are at particular risk for gender-based violence, harassment, abuse, and exploitation as remaining household members may not be decision-makers or responsible for households needs.” [Highlights added by VS]

The meaning of CDC’s repeated reference to “humanitarian settings” is unclear! Nor is it clear which segments of the population are being targeted for “shielding” in “green zones”.

  • In September, CDC announced plans for “Protecting Children from Biologic Threats.”  Parents were instructed to prepare an emergency kit for their children who may be required to be separated from their family because they might have been exposed to COVID-19. The children would be housed overnight in FEMA quarantine camps! [Ohio Statehouse News

These dictatorial, extreme measures are being imposed as coercive, psychological weapons to prevent freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, and freedom to exchange uncensored information in a democratic society.

The forced isolation measures and removal of family members to quarantine ghettoes are a militant move toward the imposition of a totalitarian regime.

  • Detailed quarantine plans for incarceration have been crafted by the several governments:

In Canada as elsewhere, the death toll is highest among elderly people living in long-term care facilities and staff members. City News reported on November 10, 2020 that in Ontario, the death toll is 3,260; of these, 2,080 were living in long-term care facilities.

Canadian data has shown that certain racialized groups are over-represented in areas with a higher COVID-19 case rate. These include Black, South Asian, Southweast Asian, and Latin American people whose most common occupations include factory workers, retail or customer service representatives and health care-related occupations.

Randy Hillier, an Independent member of Provincial Parliament, publicly exposed Canada’s plan to build COVID ‘isolation camps. His Request for Information documents from the service provider revealed that Public Health Agency Canada is currently managing 11 designated quarantine sites across Canada; that quarantines will last for 14 days, and that guards will enforce the quarantines “24 x 7”.

Hillier revealed publicly that the ‘isolation camps’ are not limited only to people with COVID-19; he asked who else the government plans to detain? At that point his microphone was turned off and his voice was silenced.

Canada’s mainstream media attacked Hillier, accusing him of disseminating “disinformation” and posting “completely false conspiracy theories.”



The best research uses external sources and does not refer back to previous articles from the same, internal source.

I regard both Mike Adams and Hal Turner to be of the same ilk - they need not be totally ignored but treated with utmost caution and certainly fact checked (in the true sense, not the MSM meaning of the term)


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.