France Teeters on the Brink ⋆ Brownstone Institute

submitted by penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable from (brownstone.org)

all 10 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]Maniak🥃😾 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sure but at least Le Pen wasn't elected in 2022 so democracy is saved, right? Right?

[–]romjpn 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Dude don't remind me. Still a punch in the gut how Macron managed to get fucking re-elected. Le-Pen isn't my cup of tea either but at least she was speaking up against the Covidomania.
Still seeing absolute corrupt idiots like Véran in power fills me with disgust.

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

democracy demockracy is saved

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

On February 14, the French National Assembly passed article 223-1-2 du code pénal. Contained therein, in Article 4 of that law, Robert Kogon writes:

Article 4 introduces a new crime into the French penal code: incitation to abandon or refrain from medical treatment or to adopt a would-be treatment, if, “in the current state of medical knowledge”, doing so “clearly” may cause harm to the person or persons in question. This crime is made punishable by one year in prison and a fine of €30,000 (£26,000) or, if the “incitation” has effect, i.e. the medical advice is followed, three years in prison and a fine of €45,000 (£39,000).

Kogon notes that this must pass the French Senate to become law. Still, it is an extremely ominous piece of legislation that clearly criminalizes medical dissent.

In effect, this is an extreme gag order on physicians, other health care personnel, and indeed anyone who dares speak out against official medical orthodoxy. In terrifyingly broad wording, it criminalizes – with hard time and crippling fines – advising against the received medical wisdom, even if the advice is not followed...Put simply, this law will destroy the doctor-patient relationship.

[–]3andfro 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It certainly calls into question the concept of "the current state of medical knowledge," when questions raised early on by reputable people were ignored, shouted down, and ridiculed and later found to be justified on many counts--"knowledge" that is available but still not widely acknowledged.

[–]CaelianPost No Toasties 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It certainly calls into question the concept of "the current state of medical knowledge"...

From an episode of Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber starring Steve Martin -- vintage SNL (04/22/78):

Unfortunately, we barbers aren’t gods. You know, medicine is not an exact science, but we are learning all the time. Why, just fifty years ago, they thought a disease like your daughter’s was caused by demonic possession or witchcraft. But nowadays we know that Isabelle is suffering from an imbalance of bodily humors, perhaps caused by a toad or a small dwarf living in her stomach.

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's hilarious. I really miss the original SNL.

[–]Maniak🥃😾 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It certainly calls into question the concept of "the current state of medical knowledge,"

It makes the authorities in power at the moment this article is being applied the judge, jury and executioner of what is this current state according to them and all their conflicts of interests. You'd have to go to court to fight the accusation and prove your innocence, which costs money.

So yeah, this is yet another attempt to scare and bully people into silence, even to the detriment of their own patients (in the case of doctors), making the "current establishment narrative" (which is what "current state of medial knowledge" means in this context) and automatic truth to be believed and followed or else.

The establishment is never wrong, and if it this it's illegal to point it out and say something else. That's what this law is.

Also, this is to be put in the context of the incoming WHO treaty. The one that got all the 'non-binding' mentions removed.

Doesn't this article read like a great companion to the WHO treaty? You're forbidden to go against the official narrative, and the official narrative becomes entirely dictated by the WHO so the local government can dismiss any complaint and appeal by saying "it's not us, we're obligated to follow what they say, and with this, so are you".

[–]3andfro 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's the embodiment of "nefarious" with a lot of slimy bodies wriggling beneath the rocks, as shown by the brave and tenacious few who work to roll those rocks away: Follow the Money: Conflicts of Interest https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/conflicts-of-interest-fahrie-hassan/?utm_source

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's an attempt to force the bought-and-paid-for TheScience™️ down people's throats.