Connect with us

Coronavirus

Visitors to California Theme Parks Told to Remain Silent on Roller Coasters to Stop COVID-19

No fun allowed.

Published

on

SOPA Images via Getty Images

Theme parks in California are set to re-open next month but visitors are being warned that they’re not allowed to sing, shout, scream or engage in heavy breathing while on rides.

Yes, really.

“The California Attractions and Parks Association (CAPA) advises in the new guidelines for its “Responsible Reopening Plan,” that theme park visitors should avoid activities that increase the spread of COVID-19, such as singing, shouting, heavy breathing and raising one’s voice,” reports People.

Visitors will also be mandated to wear masks on rides in order to “mitigate the effects of shouting,” according to the guidelines.

The rules appeared to be inspired by Japanese theme parks, which also introduced a ‘no screaming’ rule when they re-opened last summer.

From April 1 onwards, theme parks in California are allowed to re-open at just 15 per cent capacity. When Disneyland opens on April 30, only California residents will be allowed to enter.

As we previously highlighted, the CDC itself published a list of guidelines telling Americans not to sing and to limit alcohol consumption during Thanksgiving gatherings.

They followed that up shortly after by also telling Americans to restrict the spread of coronavirus by not cheering during the Super Bowl.

The “new normal” sure looks like a barrel of laughs, doesn’t it?

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading
Comments

Coronavirus

New Brunswick Grocery Stores Given Power to Ban the Unvaccinated

No jab, no food.

Published

on

NurPhoto via Getty Images

Grocery stores in New Brunswick, Canada have been given the power to ban unvaccinated people from entering, meaning the unjabbed could be prevented from conducting the essential activity of buying food.

Yes, really.

The province’s health minister Dorothy Shephard said businesses will be given the option to either enforce physical distancing or check for proof-of-vaccination.

Those businesses include “malls and grocery stores.”

Shephard said the measure, part of the region’s three-level action plan to curb the spread of COVID-19 during the winter, is necessary to reverse a “very concerning” rise in cases.

“According to a guide by Public Safety Canada, food is among the ten critical infrastructure sectors, and its delivery and preparation is considered an Essential Service and Function,” writes Ken Macon.

“Provinces have been allowed to implement their own restrictions, but grocery stores have remained open to all, regardless of vaccination status.”

The measure appears to be a fundamental violation of human rights and now must surely be challenged in the courts.

This is yet another example of how, while authorities claim the vaccine isn’t mandatory, every basic existence and lifestyle function are being removed for those who don’t take the shot.

The federal government has already banned unvaxxed Canadians from using domestic or international air and rail travel.

If this is allowed to pass, expect the next stage to be fitting unvaccinated people with electronic ankle bracelets to ensure they don’t leave their homes, or failing that just throwing them in prison.

There really is no depth to which this abyss cannot sink.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

German Study Finds Zero Healthy Children Between 5 and 18 Died From COVID

Yet country is set to push ahead with vaccines for kids anyway.

Published

on

picture alliance via Getty Images

A study conducted by researchers in Germany found that not a single healthy child between the ages of 5 and 18 died from COVID-19 in the first 15 months of the pandemic.

“Overall, the SARS-CoV-2-associated burden of a severe disease course or death in children and adolescents is low,” the scientists reported.

“This seems particularly the case for 5-11-year-old children without comorbidities.”

While COVID claimed zero lives of healthy children between the ages of 5 and 18, it only claimed the lives of six children and adolescents in that age range who had preexisting conditions.

The frequency of a child requiring intensive hospital care for COVID was also 1 in 50,000.

Between March 2020 and May 2021 a total of eight infants and toddlers died, including five with preexisting conditions, making a total of 14 Germans under the age of 18 who died from COVID during that 15 month time period.

The figures are similar to those recorded in the UK, where only six healthy children out of 12 million died of COVID-19.

“Given the known risks of vaccine-induced myocarditis in young men, the fact that Pfizer tested its mRNA vaccines on barely 3,000 children 5-11 and followed most of them for only weeks after the second dose, the German data again raises the question of how health authorities can possibly justify encouraging children or teenagers to be vaccinated,” writes Alex Berenson.

“If you let your healthy child or teenager receive the mRNA Covid vaccine, you are insane,” he adds.

Despite the results of the study, Germany is likely to offer children under the age of 12 a vaccine in the first quarter of 2022.

This will likely end up being compulsory as the country embarks on a draconian plan to make the vaccine mandatory for adults by February next year.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

Doctor Banned For Questioning Efficacy of Masks Wins High Court Case

Censorship was “clearly wrong and cannot stand.”

Published

on

Video Screenshot

A doctor in the UK who was banned from using social media by the General Medical Council for claiming “masks do nothing” has won his case in the High Court.

Dr. Samuel White was slapped with and 18 month ban by the GMC after he posted a video to Instagram and Twitter in June questioning the efficacy of face coverings.

In the video, White said why he could no longer tolerate working in his previous roles because of the “lies” around the NHS and the government’s response to the pandemic, which were “so vast” he could no longer “stomach” them.

White also committed the ultimate sin of remarking, “masks do nothing” to stop the spread of COVID, despite this being the consensus medical opinion at the start of the pandemic before it mysteriously switched almost overnight.

The doctor also expressed concerns about the safety of vaccines and the reliability of COVID tests.

White took his case against the GMC to the High Court on the basis of his freedom of expression “to engage in medical, scientific and political debate and discussion,” White’s barrister, Francis Hoar, told a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Hoar added that White’s opinions were “supported by large bodies of scientific and medical opinion” and had been “statements of fact and opinions about pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to the pandemic.”

GMC’s Alexis Hearnden claimed that White’s views were not only misinformation, but posed a “risk” to the public because they didn’t align with official pronouncements.

However, the court ruled in favor of White, asserting that the tribunal which banned him from speaking had violated the 1998 Human Rights Act.

The ruling concluded that the tribunal’s decision was “an error of law and a clear misdirection,” meaning the decision was “clearly wrong and cannot stand.”

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending