top of page


[Ed, my notes in RED]

As for the personal fall-out from the mandates, my employment was terminated to punish my non-compliance. I was the only one at my job who directly objected to the mandates.

The mandate I faced was a vaccine-or-test requirement in which individuals who failed to provide the employer with proof of vaccination had to submit Covid-19 test results each week. Faced with an alternative of compulsory vaccination, most people see the testing option as a palatable compromise.

Even many critics of the mandates treated testing as a reasonable option, and there was almost no discussion about the implications of a requirement that employees be tested regularly. While forcible vaccination is a clear violation of bodily autonomy, a testing mandate, though less invasive, is equally sinister in its ramifications.

The following are reasons why a Covid-19 testing mandate for employees is objectionable:

Why Not Just Comply With a Testing Mandate?

  • Such a requirement is over broad and under inclusive, which belies its true punitive intent. It catches people like myself with natural immunity, while excluding the vaccinated employees who are perfectly capable of catching and transmitting the virus. If reducing transmission was the true goal of mandated testing, all employees would be subjected to the requirement. Further, a person can test positive for SARS-CoV-2 without actually being contagious. For instance, people who recovered from Covid-19 and who are no longer contagious can continue to test positive in the following months. [PCR Tests are notoriously unreliable. They can't detect Covid-19, only mitochondrial cell fragments, that are present in everyone with an immune system. The number of cycles used in the PCT Test (anything over 30 will give a false positive) determines the outcome]

  • It requires providing genetic samples to for-profit companies that will sell that data without consent or ability to control the information. [New nano-particle genetic engineering allows pathogens to be targeted at specific genomes – potentially attacking millions in one go]

  • The tests are conditional on emergency-use authorizations, and Americans have a right to withhold consent to such devices. Threatening a person’s livelihood effectively negates their statutory right by creating a coercive condition. [The 'Vaccines' are also only authorised for emergency use only, which is why the emergency rules keep being extended]

  • For those who are employed by government establishments, mandated Covid-19 tests are effectively government searches without a warrant, probable cause, or even any type of individualised suspicion. [Mandated Tests are a gross violation of person's right to clinical choice]

  • It is retaliatory for people like myself who have medical conditions that contraindicate Covid-19 vaccination. [Big Brother wants everyone to comply].

  • It violates due process rights.

  • Covid-19 tests applied in this manner are medical devices that offer no medically therapeutic benefits, and it is objectionable to force medical intervention on a person that will not benefit them in any way. [See Nuremberg Code]

  • Because many people subject to such mandates were already coming to the office and putting themselves at risk for contracting the virus during the height of the pandemic, (including when no vaccine or PPC was available), it beggars belief that these employees suddenly became unreasonably dangerous overnight. [How many supermarket workers were affected during the early days of the Covid-19 'pandemic, having come into contact with thousands of people, before masks were mandated?].

  • Such mandates are an egregious, unilateral incursion on workers’ rights that will forever change the employer-employee relationship to the detriment of employees. [How can you ever trust an employer that disregards your God given rights?]

  • It further cements a precedent in which employers can unilaterally add required tasks that the employee has to perform on the employee’s own, personal time without pay. An expectation is being created (as with daily health screenings) that permit the employer to take greater incursions on the employee’s private time and expense without recompense. All employees, vaccinated or not, will be harmed by this precedent in the future. [Just say NO – If they persist, an employment tribunal would find for the employee every time].

  • Neither the government nor an employer should be able to control a person’s body or make medical decisions for that person. Our bodies are our own. If we let them have that power, there is no end to what they might compel us to do with our bodies in the future. [See Nuremberg Code]

  • Such mandates encourage treating illness as a moral fault or healthy people as though they are sick. We are coming dangerously close to treating human life as a medical condition unto itself. This shaming, punitive attitude around illness embodied in mandates such as these erode public health by disincentivising people from seeking medical attention, disclosing potential contagion, fully convalescing, or otherwise taking the proper precautions that could alert others to the fact that they are contagious and otherwise prevent further transmission. [You don't need to test healthy people for a non-existent condition]

  • The testing requirement has a disparate impact on various protected classes and is therefore discriminatory. [Equality and Discrimination Act, 2010]

  • Unvaccinated human beings are not perpetually sick and should not be treated like they belong to a dirty and diseased subclass of humanity. No one should be subjected to such blatantly dehumanizing, disparate treatment. [Behavioural Change Psychological warfare]

  • I, personally, believe nature and the body are sacred, and having to beg permission from the government to continue existing as I am is spiritually degrading. We should not have to supplant our respective faiths with the personal, religious beliefs of politicians. [All part of the de-humanising process]

  • Letting government interfere with personal medical decisions on the grounds of public health paves the way for the further erosion of reproductive rights, among other integral personal rights. [See Nuremberg Code above]

  • Given that humans are covered in viruses and bacteria by default, these mandates are creating a new system of medical totalitarianism in which any healthy person can, with the right test, be deemed by the government a health risk at any time, for indefinite periods without due process, without even being sick or contagious. Innocent people are being stigmatized and penalized by this system for simply existing. [Behavioural Modification Psy-Op]

  • It is a punitive measure solely intended to penalize people who do not submit to the government’s political whims. We should not reward the government’s unethical and cruel use of coercion and duress. [Behavioural Modification Psy-Op]

  • Compliance will not end the government’s prosecutorial stance, but rather will further embolden it to escalate its tyranny. [As my Grandmother said, “give 'em an inch, and they will take a mile”]

  • Such mandates are the beginning of a new relationship with the government in which an individual’s control over her body and beliefs is subordinate to politicians’ political agendas. I do not wish to be in a toxic relationship with the government in which I have no agency. [See Nuremberg Code]

  • Such measures are priming the populace for the implementation of a continuous bio-surveillance state. [Digital Currency, Digital Passport/ID, Biometric identification, Facial Recognition, Social Credit schemes are all part of the state control mechanism]

  • These mandates are irrational and undemocratic, and we have been unable to have a full and honest discussion about them due to the heavy-handed climate of censorship and groupthink that currently pervades society. Especially in New York. [Mainstream media and Social media ignore anything but the government line, independent press and bloggers are deplatformed and cancelled]

  • Such mandates violate the rule of law. One does not dispense with the rule of law in an emergency; it is precisely in an emergency that adherence to the rule of law is most necessary. When we abandon our values in times of emergency, we get abominations like Japanese internment camps, McCarthyism, and the fraudulent invasion of Iraq. After it is all over, people wonder how these things could happen. This is how it happens: by forsaking our long-term political values to address short-term fears and exigencies. We should not let fears about Covid-19 cause us to undermine our constitutional norms.


21 views0 comments
bottom of page