[Epoch Times December 10, 2021]Hello, audience friends, I am Yokogawa. Welcome everyone to the “Yokogawa View” channel. Today is Thursday, December 9th.
Today’s focus: The US Senate passed an order to reject vaccines from private companies, the New York High Court temporarily blocked the Mayor’s vaccine order, and the current status of the three federal vaccine orders. Many countries are following up the US diplomatic sanctions against the Beijing Winter Olympics. Who is still waiting to see.
The U.S. Senate passed an order to reject vaccines from private companies, and the Supreme Court of New York temporarily blocked the deluxe vaccine order. Several vaccine orders were blocked at the legislative, court, and state levels; new polls on how Americans view religious exemptions for vaccines; FDA needs 75 years to process vaccine data ; Many countries joined the diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics. What happened to French President Macron’s depoliticization of the Olympics and the uselessness of diplomatic boycotts?
U.S. Senate bill to block private company vaccines has blocked multiple vaccine orders in the Circuit Court of Appeals
Yesterday, the Senate rejected Biden’s vaccination order against private companies at 52:48, and two Democratic senators joined the Republican Party. This is based on a “Congressional Review Act”, which helps the minority party in the Senate pass a law against an executive order.
However, like any bill, it needs to be passed by the House of Representatives, which is very unlikely to pass, which gives Biden the power to veto. In fact, Biden has already stated that it will veto it. This plan may not be able to prevent the injunction, but it shows that American society still has a strong force trying to maintain personal freedom under the specific circumstances of the epidemic.
As Senator Mike Lee from Utah said, injunctions are unconstitutional, illegal and morally untenable. At the same time, mandatory vaccines continue to be blocked in multiple courts: A judge of the New York Supreme Court temporarily blocked de Blasio’s vaccine injunction, pending a hearing scheduled for December 14.
This is a lawsuit against the deluxe executive order in October, which requires all city government employees to be vaccinated compulsorily, and those who violate it will be suspended. The administrative order met with great resistance. Police and firefighting staff would warn that it would cause a shortage of manpower and make it impossible to complete the task.
However, on Monday, De Blasio issued an administrative order requiring all employees of private companies in New York City to be vaccinated. The effective date is December 27. It is estimated that it will also be challenged by law.
At the federal level, of the three vaccine injunctions, two were shelved by courts nationwide and one was shelved in three states.
Let me summarize the situation in this regard: 1) The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s emergency provisional standard (ETS) mandatory vaccination and periodic testing order for large companies with more than 100 people is now in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The vaccination order is in Enforcement is temporarily prohibited nationwide, and the circuit court is likely to decide this case after December 10th, and the original deadline for vaccination orders; 2) Federal health worker vaccination orders are currently prohibited nationwide ; 3) The federal government contractor vaccination order is currently prohibited in 3 states.
Prospects: If the first vaccination order, that is, the vaccination order for enterprises with more than 100 people, is rejected by the court, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is unlikely to continue to issue similar orders, but this ruling will not affect the other two administrative orders.
Here we see a phenomenon that multiple courts are quite consistent in compulsory vaccine orders! I personally think this is a question of personal freedom and rights. Who is the power?
The third resistance comes from state legislation and executive orders that prohibit the implementation of compulsory vaccination orders in this state. The leaders are Florida and Texas.
New poll: 1 in 10 Americans reject vaccines on religious grounds, and more than half support religious exemptions
The reasons for rejecting vaccines vary, and the largest proportion may be religious beliefs. According to the results of a poll released today, one in ten Americans said that their religious beliefs do not allow them to be vaccinated. This ratio is higher than I expected. There are some differences here. Most people who refuse from a religious perspective believe that they violated their personal religious beliefs rather than religious doctrines.
But importantly, the same survey showed that 58% of Americans believe that there should be a religious exemption as far as the COVID-19 vaccine is concerned. Interestingly, almost the same proportion of Americans (59%) believe that too many people take advantage of the religious exemption, while 60% of the respondents believe that there is no sufficient religious reason to reject the COVID-19 vaccine.
FDA requires 75 years to process vaccine data approved within 108 days
From my personal point of view, whether the COVID-19 vaccine is effective or not, it should be there, especially for the original virus, because it was designed for that, but there are several problems:
1) With the mutation of the virus, the targeted effectiveness of the vaccine is also declining. For example, the effect of the delta variant is poor, and it is likely to be worse for Omicron, and the countermeasure is to continuously increase the strengthening needle;
2) The breakthrough infection is obviously much higher than that of various other vaccines in the past. This is the same in vaccines with different design principles. It is likely to be caused by the characteristics of the virus, which makes compulsory vaccination lack of people. Convincing reason
3) The development time of this vaccine is too short, and the new mRNA vaccine technology is used, and the side effects have not been sufficiently evaluated. The FDA approval only draws a line in the law, but there is no such line in science. The FDA should make decisions on a scientific basis, and the FDA’s decision itself is not scientific evidence.
Finally, Harvard’s research on 68 countries shows that there is no evidence to prove the correlation between the epidemic and vaccination.
Vaccine doubts: Preliminary clinical data from South Africa show that Pfizer’s protection against Omicron is 41 times lower. BioNTech announced that the three-dose vaccine can prevent Omicron, while the CEO of Pfizer said that people may need the fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine earlier than expected.
Now the concept of vaccines seems to have completely changed. If the third and fourth shots are needed to continue to fight, is it still a vaccine? The problem now is the effectiveness of the vaccine, and even the anti-epidemic policy is entirely up to the vaccine manufacturer. This is very problematic.
Another very unreasonable thing is that the court requested the FDA to provide data on Pfizer and Monard vaccines. The FDA requested that 75 years later, an increase of 20 years from the original 55 years, said it was processed at a rate of 500 pages per day. This is unreasonable. If the FDA does not have enough time to process the data, how can it be approved for use within 100 days?
If it takes 75 years to process, then the data should be processed after 75 years before approval. It might make sense that vaccines used to take ten years to get approved.
Follow-up of diplomatic boycott, French opposition, sports politicization and total boycott
Regarding the diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics, after the program was completed the day before yesterday, there has been a lot of progress. On the one hand, there have been many countries, including Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Lithuania, and Kosovo. There are 7 countries in total, namely Five Eyes. The Alliance, Lithuania, and Kosovo have all announced different degrees of boycotts or non-participation. Other European countries are still waiting and watching, but it is expected that there will be some actual boycotts, no matter what the excuses are.
France is special. In an interview yesterday, the French Minister of Education and Sports made it clear that France will not diplomatically boycott the Beijing Winter Olympics, but French Foreign Minister Le Drian said today that this issue must be finalized at the level of the unified position of the European Union. Today, President Macron said that diplomatic boycotts are of little use. It also mentioned that the Olympics should not be politicized.
I don’t think his total boycott is real. France may have its own reasons for not following up. After all, three of the Five Eyes Alliance, Australia, the United States, and Britain, have just entered into a nuclear submarine agreement and cancelled their contract with France. Moreover, France is the host country of the 2024 Summer Olympics. Being boycotted, the position is a bit subtle. This may be a bit like what I said last time that after the West boycotted the Moscow Olympics in 1980, the socialist camp boycotted the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984.
I now want to talk about the two issues Macron mentioned. One is the issue of the politicization of sports. In an interview, Minister of Education Browne said: “The relationship between sports and politics must be handled carefully.” He said that sports should be protected from it. Political interference.
Opposition to the politicization of sports is also the reason for the CCP. In fact, for the CCP, the use of international events such as the Olympics, the presence of politicians from various countries at the opening ceremony, and the formation of a scene of nations coming to North Korea, have always been political behaviors to strengthen the legitimacy of its rule. In fact, leaders of various countries If you are not a sports fan, you do not need to participate in any Olympic opening ceremony. For any host country, inviting foreign politicians is somewhat politicized. In fact, it is enough to let the athletes go to the competition.
Of course, the general country is not so serious, but in China, it is definitely politics, and it is the most important politics. Therefore, the diplomatic boycott is instead an act of depoliticizing the Olympics.
The other is a diplomatic boycott or a full boycott. There is a question of feasibility. In fact, diplomatic boycott is the most feasible, and it has a strong symbolic meaning. It may not be so important to other countries, but it is very important to the CCP, and it has a good image.
A total boycott, at least for now, is almost impossible. As for the total boycott, I think it is more feasible to change the venue of the game, that is, to change from Beijing to other countries. Of course, the International Olympic Committee will not make this decision, but it is indeed a plan that will cause the least harm to athletes. Personally, I am not biased on this issue. It is just a comparatively objective analysis of various possibilities and feasibility.
I talked about two things today. A comprehensive introduction to the current administrative orders for compulsory vaccination in the United States and the resistance it faces. The resistance comes from three levels: legislation, courts at all levels, and state governments. The other is the current situation and prospects of the diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics.
If you like my show, please don’t forget to like, subscribe and forward. Regarding the democracy summit that is currently being held, I made a special program, which is still broadcasted on YouTube at 9 o’clock EST on Saturday night. After the broadcast, it will be posted on the member website of Youleke. On the member website, except for my program, There are many other programs, everyone is welcome to check it out, and thank you viewers who have subscribed to member channels and long-term support. Okay, thank you for watching, and see you next time.
Production Team of “Yokogawa View”
Editor in charge: Li Hao#
.