Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

This section covers all topics relating to Covid, Lockdown and the new normal.
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

I don`t think Tegnell is more honest than other government officials in the position they hold, in this case state epidemiologist. Keep in mind that Sweden may only be used as an exaple of how "bad" the plandemic may be if less or no restrictions than other countries. His statements regards masks and high death rates in Sweden only proves that he doesn`t consider the corona virus pandemic to be a hoax. The common flu death rates show the numbers world wide to be unusually high in 2017/2018(just do a research on it), yet he compare it to 2019 - a year with lower flu numbers. "Don`t let a wolf in sheeps clothing fool you."

Here is his next statement:

Published: 17. september 2020

"Little flu contributed to high coronary mortality"
State epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.jpg
State epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.jpg (72.45 KiB) Viewed 1378 times
"Sweden's high corona death toll can be partly explained by the fact that there was a mild flu season in 2019, according to state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.
"There is a strong link between a low over mortality rate as a result of influenza and high covid-19 over mortality," Tegnell told Dagens Nyheter newspaper.

That the flu season was mild meant that many of the sick and vulnerable, who are usually the first to die during a common flu, survived. Then they became infected by the coronavirus and died from this instead, according to Tegnell.

"What has now been seen is that countries that have had a fairly low mortality rate from influenza in the last two, three years, like Sweden, have a very high over-mortality rate of covid-19," he says.

Unni (68) tells about the way back to life after coronary artery disease: – The disease gets you so far down that you have to fight hard to get back to life (Dagsavisen+)

–While those who had a high flu mortality in the last two winters, such as Norway, have had quite a low covid mortality rate. The same tendency has been seen in several countries. This may not be the whole explanation, but part of it, Tegnell believes.

87,575 have so far tested positive for coronaviruses in Sweden, where 5,860 coronary-related deaths have been recorded.

Sweden thus has 58 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants, almost as many as the United States. Norway, by comparison, has five, Finland seven and Denmark eleven. The average in the world is twelve."

https://www.dagsavisen.no/nyheter/verde ... -1.1774638
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

In this article the traitor of Sweden Tegnell will contribute to more irrational panic to make an example of Sweden. No mentioning of the harmful effects which stems from 5g, of course. I have once again translated the text for you to see the media spin here in Scandinavia and will continue to do so:

"Sweden's state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell informs about the situation in Sweden.

A total of 5870 have died from the coronavirus in Sweden, writes SVT.

That's what the "Folkhälsomyndigheten" told a press conference on Tuesday.

"Above all, infection among younger people and people in work increases. In all groups except those of 70+ we see an increase," says Anders Tegnell, the Swedish state epidemiologist.

Tegnell says there is an expected effect of school start-ups, and that more people are back in the workplace.

Anders Tegnell.jpg
Anders Tegnell.jpg (83.16 KiB) Viewed 1334 times
"We see that young people in upper secondary school are responsible for much of the increase in the children's group right now. Albeit at low levels. Among other schoolchildren, the numbers are quite low, as it should be," says Tegnell.

The sport is affected:

The infection is increasing in Stockholm, and in the region dalarna an outbreak of infection should be connected to an ice hockey team.

According to Aftonbladet's overview, there are 24,117 infected people in Stockholm, and 2,451 infected in Dalarna.

"Now the sport, especially ice hockey, seems to be very affected. It is important that those who work with and are in this keep their distance, and organize training and competition so that you do not get close together. I don't think the virus is spreading on the ice, I think it happens in locker rooms and when you meet before and after training," Tegnell said.

The outbreak of infection in Dalarna is temporarily not so large that local infection measures will be introduced in the region, Tegnell answers questions from a reporter, according to Aftonbladet.

Infection increases in the capital:

A total of 89,436 people have been confirmed infected in Sweden, writes SVT. That's 1,199 more than on Friday, writes Aftonbladet.

In Swedish intensive care units, 2,594 people with coronary artery infection have so far been admitted, the press conference said.

Norwegians can currently travel to Blekinge, Gotland, Kalmar, Norrbotten, Södermanland, Värmland, Västerbotten, Västernorrland, according to the Government's travel overview.

Travel advice is valid until October 1.
The criteria for removing the entry quarantines

In order for the entry quarantine to a country can be removed, it must meet the criteria of the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.

There must be fewer than 20 confirmed cases per 100,000 inhabitants in the last two weeks.
Fewer than 5 percent positive samples average per week over the past two weeks.
In addition, an overall assessment of the countries, based on trends in infection figures, and other relevant information is made."
https://www.nrk.no/norge/smitteokning-i ... 1.15170868
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

Next media spin and a step further towards totalitarianism - Tormenting, shaming and destroying the young ones lives in Norway by hiring security guards in schools:

"School hires security guards to ensure good infection protection

HORTEN (NRK): The principal of Horten Upper Secondary School is not satisfied with the infection protection at the school. If students do not follow the rules, they may have a reduced behavioural grade or be dismissed.
School hires security guards.jpg
School hires security guards.jpg (100.05 KiB) Viewed 1329 times

Principal Gisle Birkeland says he sees violations of infection control rules every day.

A month has passed since schools restarted after the holidays.

The headteacher of Horten Upper Secondary School, Gisle Birkeland, says he unfortunately sees violations of infection control rules every day. He has also spoken to students who are concerned.

From Tuesday, Securitas guards have been deployed in public areas.

"What we are going to do in particular is to make sure that students hold the meter in a better way than what they can remember in their joy," birkeland says.
Forgetting himself

The rules that apply are well informed through both infection control courses and other channels.

"We see headlines around us. In Oslo there is a chaotic picture, same with Bergen. And it may be only a matter of time before we have the same chaotic picture here.

He doesn't think the youth are deliberately dropping the infection, but that it's quick to forget about themselves when they sit closer in the classroom and are considered a cohort there. Then comes recess and other free time where one socializes other than classmates.

So far, 38 people have been found in Horten, according to the municipality's website.
Gisle Bringeland

Principal Gisle Birkeland.jpg
Principal Gisle Birkeland.jpg (83.16 KiB) Viewed 1329 times
UNDERSTANDING: The principal of Horten Upper Secondary School understands that students can forget to comply with infection control rules at all times.
May have consequences

Initially, the task of the public guards is to patrol the school discreetly, but with a uniform so that they are easy to spot.

"If someone breaks the rules, they will receive a friendly reminder to follow the school's infection control rules," Birkeland says.

If students do not comply with what they are asked for, it may result in remarks or other sanctions.
May have a reduced grade

In the extreme, it can result in impaired behavioural character, expulsion or a conversation with the principal.

"Trust is much better than punishment. We are all on the team here," says former student council leader, Truls August Råen.
"This means that they are out of control. They bring in people of power to get us to follow the rules."

He believes that the teachers or management could have gone around talking to the students.

"I think this is going to lead to discontent and more unrest," says Råen.
– Sitting in clusters

Sara Hauenschild, a student at the school, says most people don't take the infection seriously.

- They're in clusters at lunch. You walk in clusters up the stairs here, and in the cafeteria no one holds the meter.

She understands why the school is taking action, while admitting that freedom will disappear somewhat.

"Teachers don't have the capacity to go and look after our students, and when students can't look after ourselves, that's how it has to be."

https://www.nrk.no/vestfoldogtelemark/l ... 1.15169048
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

Then we have the threat of upcoming face mask injunctions for "protection" against the false virus pandemic, now coming to Norway as well. The traitors running the country want to make it compulsory, but of course only on public transport which they don`t use anyway - after all they are "special, sanctified" individuals with private chauffeurs paid by the taxpayers they themselves refer to as "common people 8-) Wow how they are cool (sarcasm). Here is the newest media spin translated to English:

"55 new cases of infection in Oslo last 24 hours – considering face mask injunctions

55 new cases of infection have been registered in Oslo in the last 24 hours. The municipality is considering introducing an injunction to use a face mask in situations where one cannot keep one meter distance.
Oslo City Councilman Raymond Johansen .jpg
Oslo City Councilman Raymond Johansen .jpg (91.58 KiB) Viewed 1326 times
Face mask: Oslo City Councilman Raymond Johansen says the municipality is considering introducing a request for the use of a face mask.

"If we do not get control of the infection in Oslo, we must consider far more stringent measures. One of the measures we are looking at is to offer a face mask" says Raymond Johansen, City Councilman in Oslo (Ap), NRK.

According to the city councilleader, an injunction will be applicable to public transport. But even other places where it is difficult to keep one meter distance, may become applicable.

On Tuesday, 55 new cases were registered in Oslo, compared with 26 the day before, according to figures from the municipality.

"We hope that we can avoid an injunction. I would encourage employers to arrange for employees to have a home office. So that those who can't work from home have plenty of space on public transport," says Johansen.

Oslo municipality is also considering bringing in all food outlets to register guests. The municipality has already encouraged all food outlets to register guests to make infection tracking easier. But it's not mandatory.

Sharp increase in infection:

On Monday, the municipality tightened the corona rules in Oslo. As of Tuesday, more than ten people were banned from collecting in private homes.

Oslo has experienced a steady increase in infection recently. On Monday, all of Oslo's 15 districts were coloured red. That is, they have over 20 infected per 100,000 inhabitants in the last two weeks.

On Wednesday, 14 of 15 districts were red. Vestre Aker is the only yellow district in Oslo, with 17.9 infected.

Calling for tracking app:

The work on infection tracking in Oslo is described as very demanding. According to the councillor, the challenge is greatest among those between the ages of 20 and 29.

The municipality has seen examples of some young people infected having been in contact with up to 250 people.

Johansen is now asking health authorities to come on to the pitch with a new infection tracking app.

"We need a functional infection tracking app to develop," says Johansen."

Even the false numbers are almost the same, but hey, why bother doing some research when you can hang on Facebook and Instagram or perhaps watch a fucking meaningless show on TV or Netflix, right? :roll:
no.jpg (27.99 KiB) Viewed 1326 times

https://www.nrk.no/norge/oslo-kommune-v ... 1.15171693
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

Police state and fascism on the rise in Norway - the treachery continues. "Decided" by a "poll" :evil:


"Introducing an injunction on the use of face mask in public transport

Councillor Raymond Johansen (Labour Party) has previously received criticism from the Minister of Health for not introducing stricter coronary measures in the capital. Today, the city council tightened some measures.
"I hope the national authorities will continue to have confidence that we know our citizens best," Raymond Johansen said at today's press conference.

There he presented new stricter measures for Oslo, which will last until 13 October. After that, the city council will make a new assessment.

These are the measures:

Mandatory use of face masks on public transport when it is not possible to keep a meter distance.
Mandatory registration of guests at food outlets
Temporary ban on indoor events with more than 50 participants without permanent seating.
Introduces the use of face masks in the nursing home where it is not possible to keep a distance.

–When it is not possible to keep a metre distance, travelers should use a face mask .That means everyone has to bring a face mask on board," Johansen said.

But the city council will not follow the Directorate of Health's recommendation to restrict more than five people from gathering in private homes.

"If we are to continue to succeed, keep the infection down, we must earn people's trust," he said, adding:

"We must show that we are introducing only the measures necessary.
Dropping more recommended measures

Health Minister Bent Høie (H) has previously said he is "very concerned" that the corona will spread out of Oslo. On Sunday it emerged that he is prepared to make national decisions if the city council does not follow up on the Advice of the Directorate of Health.

"We believe the measures that Oslo municipality has now are not strong enough," the Minister of Health said at a press conference on Monday.
The Directorate recommends a package of measures for 14 days.
Norways Minister of Health Bent Høye.jpg
Norways Minister of Health Bent Høye.jpg (25.52 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
The Norwegian Directorate of Health recommended oslo the following, which the municipality has chosen not to implement:

Prohibition of private collections with more than five people.
Drop-in to venues closes at 10 p.m.
Prohibition of events at secondary schools and universities that are not teaching-related.

On Monday it emerged that the Conservative Party is also calling on all municipalities around the capital to discuss possible contagion measures tonight.
– Went too far
The councillor spoke of the disagreements between him and the Minister of Health.

"We have been a little disagreeable about what measures to introduce," Johansen said.

He thinks it is very unfortunate that the Conservative Party has threatened to override the municipality.

"I think the Minister of Health went too far, I think it's unwise. I think we are very served by trusting each other and taking the measures necessary.

He also pointed out that a conflict between Oslo and the state would only weaken people's trust in politicians and the authorities.

This is not a power struggle. This is about people's lives and jobs," he said.
Health Councillor Robert Steen believes the city council has now introduced strict enough measures.
"We have assessed the advice we have received from the Directorate of Health. We have chosen the measures that we believe are best taken and that are perceived as little restrictive as possible," said Steen.
Robert Steen.jpg
Robert Steen.jpg (23.18 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
Infection rates may go up

In the last 24 hours, 33 new coronary artery infected have been registered in the capital. That's four fewer than the number of new infected Saturday, according to the update from the municipality.

But that does not necessarily mean that there has been a decrease in the number of infected. Less than half as many were tested Saturday and Sunday, compared to the previous weekend. Thus, the numbers can go up during the week.

Health Minister Bent Høie (H) expects Oslo to follow advice on stricter measures and asks the municipality to take responsibility."

https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/byradet- ... 1.15178601

The coronary quarrel blown off for this time: – We would have liked to have avoided this," says Høie.

The corona duel between Health Minister Bent Høie and Councillor Raymond Johansen came to an abrupt end on Monday evening. It is now moving towards a face mask in Oslo's neighbouring municipalities.
We would have liked to have avoided this," Health Minister Bent Høie said of the recent hard-line discussion between the Oslo City Council and the Minister of Health about how strict contagion measures are necessary in Oslo.

The last few days have highlighted a fierce debate between Health Minister Bent Høie (H) and The City Council leader in Oslo Raymond Johansen (Labour Party).

The core of the controversy has been whether Oslo has done enough to limit the coronamite.
On Monday evening, høie called an urgent meeting with neighbouring municipalities around Oslo about the "very worrying" situation in the capital.

Bent Høye.jpg
Bent Høye.jpg (57.06 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
"Oslo must now take responsibility," Høie said on Monday morning. The minister also indirectly threatened that the government "may introduce national measures at short notice."
Later in the evening, Oslo City Council leader Raymond Johansen announced an injunction on a face mask and a ban on private events without a permanent seat with more than 50 guests.
Raymond Johansen presented new coronary measures at a press conference at Oslo City Hall on Monday evening. Download the executives list
"I think the Minister of Health went too far. It's unwise," Johansen said. He refused to introduce several of the measures in Oslo as the Conservative Party wants. This means, for example, that it is not forbidden to collect more than five people in private homes.

Raymond Johansen.jpg
Raymond Johansen.jpg (79.47 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
On Monday evening, Høie said he was pleased with the measures in Oslo, which he termed "a good package."
"I am very pleased with the job the city council is doing

"We have had this discussion over time. But I think they have now come up with a good package that I am 100 per cent behind," says Høie.
At the same time, Høie admitted that he should have been besides the quarrel in recent days. Councillor Raymond Johansen warned earlier in the evening that the Conservative Party's proposals over the weekend could go beyond the confidence of the infection control measures of politicians and health authorities.

"We would have liked to have avoided that," høie said.

"I strongly agree that we must avoid conflicts.
Oslo has been characterized by a lot of coronary infection in recent weeks.
He described the measures in Oslo as "a good package", although Oslo has chosen to ignore several of the advice from the Conservative Party.

"I am very pleased with the job the city council is now doing. Oslo is in the first line to ensure that Norway as a country will continue to have control over the spread of infection. They do that job well," says Høie.

"I believe that Oslo has now come to a unified package that is adapted to the contagion situation in Oslo and which is adapted to the national councils.
Development of infection in Oslo

The table shows the number of developments in new cases of infection in Oslo since July. The table shows that the growth has levelled off in Oslo in the last seven days, but that the number is still more than twice as high as in August.
Health Minister Bente Høie would not comment on oslo's decision to reject several of the measures he recommended.

"What has been my point is not every measure for him. It's been the overall package. I find that Oslo has made a strong enough package for the situation they are in," he told Aftenposten.
Will have a face mask in Oslo's nearest neighbouring municipalities

Høie wants more of the neighbouring municipalities around Oslo to now consider introducing the same measures as Oslo.
"Several of the measures are necessary for the municipalities around Oslo to take the basis," says Høie. He would not comment on individual measures, but asks the municipalities to lay oslo's package the basis for their work, coordinate themselves and make local adjustments.
Oslo.jpg (148.82 KiB) Viewed 1282 times

This means that people in the nearest municipalities around Oslo can be ordered to have a face mask.

"It doesn't make sense to go on public transport in Bærum and wait until you get to the Oslo border to put on a face mask," says Høie.

The Oslo City Council has justified its opposition to several of the Conservative Party's measures, with the growth of new infected people flattening out in the past week. After an increase growth up to week 38, the figures in the last week show the same contagion figures as the week before.

"Oslo has exactly the same high level of infection as the week before. But flattening out at a high level is not good enough. This is where the infection must be reduced," Høie said.
Co.jpg (28.02 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
An Opinion poll shows that there is a clear majority among those surveyed about strict measures of infection.
Seven 72 per cent of those surveyed do not think the measures the authorities have introduced are too strict.
15 per cent believe the measures go too far. The survey was conducted before Oslo introduced a face mask in the event of congestion in public transport.
Six7 per cent are supporters of the use of face masks, which is twice as much as in May.

"The number of Norwegians who think the guidelines are too strict has never been as low as now," says Senior Adviser Nora Clausen of Opinion."

Hospitalized and intensive care patients with covid-19 in Norway:
Hospitalized and intensive care patients with covid-19 in Norway.jpg
Hospitalized and intensive care patients with covid-19 in Norway.jpg (19.65 KiB) Viewed 1282 times

https://www.aftenposten.no/osloby/i/Ln0 ... erne-ha-un
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

Yesterday, Sunday Oktober 25, the first protest against corona restrictions, held in front of Stortinget, Oslo, Norway. About 150 people rallied for the protest. Most information has been censored, but here is one article:

https://resett.no/2020/10/21/arrangerer ... -covid-19/

Organizes demonstration against the government's handling of Covid-19

"The Facebook group "Stop Lockdown: Full reopening of Norway NOW" is arranging a demonstration outside the Storting next Sunday.

The group has received attention from Faktisk.no as several groups who are skeptical of the authority's corona lockdown have grown large. The "fact checker" has interviewed one of the organizers.

Responsible organizer Nader Eide tells Faktisk that the corona measures in Norway are unnecessary.

- I believe, like many others, that the measures are not in accordance with what is actually happening. I base that on numbers. The measures intervene quite deeply in the privacy of people. If you look at the disadvantages of the measures, you will easily see that there have been too many unnecessary measures, says Eide.

Faktisk.no has chosen to censor the group's name so that people will not be able to search for it on Facebook.
In the description on Facebook, where the group has invited to join the demonstration, they write that the mortality of the virus is not in proportion to the government's measures.

"The fact is that only 270 people have died from the virus. Average age 85 years. 90% had a chronic illness before. This is 1/5 of the normal number of deaths each flu season. The virus' mortality and danger are not in proportion to the government's measures, legislative changes, injunctions and rule changes ", they write.

Those responsible for the event believe that the government's corona measures are highly invasive and a violation of people's right to privacy, democratic treatment of legislative change processes and legal justice.

"Globally, the virus has killed exactly as many people as the flu kills each year. Sweden treats this as the flu and has about the same number, slightly higher. Their infection rate is lower than Norway's. Norway must treat this as the flu by keeping the old and sick at home, but let the rest of Norway function as normal ", they write further.

Great commitment in Norway

This is the first demonstration to be held in Norway against corona restrictions. In other large cities around the world, there have been large demonstrations with several thousand people. There have been large demonstrations in both England and Germany, but these protests have received very little attention in the Norwegian press.

Faktisk.no writes that they have seen how several different Facebook groups with opposition to the authorities' infection control measures have grown rapidly.

"One group in particular grew very fast. In about a week, the group had reached over 5,000 members. The group now has over 8,000 members - just over three weeks after it was established ", writes Faktisk.

"The group fronts a message that the authorities' measures are more intrusive than necessary to deal with the coronavirus, which is compared to the flu," writes Faktisk and adds that this claim is "completely wrong".
User avatar
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:33 pm
Location: Køge- Denmark
Has thanked: 181 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by monsdk »

so now in Denmark the face diaper by 29/10 20 becomes mandatory in all indoor public facility's, as "mette frederiksen" the traitor pm, came out and said. and this is just before the new pandemic law is up for vote. on the 13/11 20 (again with their numbers)
the pandemic law that if going through will give them full power over everything in a danish persons life. also G4S (geforce is the real name) have gotten a contract to do police work in Denmark
people ask your self " what does it it cost to live on earth" then putt seeds in your left hand you can live from, and money/gold/silver in your right hand.
Now go plant them both, and then see Which one will give you something you can eat.
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

monsdk wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:42 pm so now in Denmark the face diaper by 29/10 20 becomes mandatory in all indoor public facility's, as "mette frederiksen" the traitor pm, came out and said.
All politicians are traitors working for the same global totalitarian agenda.
The Norwegian government usually follow Denmark so we will likely experience the same issues as you do just around the corner. The majority of the people here are wearing face masks, but I have not worn it once.
monsdk wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:42 pm also G4S (geforce is the real name) have gotten a contract to do police work in Denmark
I searched for the geforce/G4S, an international security company, headquarter located in London:


G4S.jpg (81.22 KiB) Viewed 1082 times

monsdk wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:42 pm and this is just before the new pandemic law is up for vote. on the 13/11 20 (again with their numbers)
the pandemic law that if going through will give them full power over everything in a danish persons life.
Interesting that you mentioning voting for a new pandemic law.
In Norway there was a temporary corona virus law, but now it`s even worse because they don`t really need that to do what they do. It is a dictatorship!

Power of attorney law
"Power of attorney law, a common term for a law in which the legislative power, the Storting, gives other bodies the authority to make further provisions of a legal nature.

The Constitution has no rules on such delegation of authority, but it has nevertheless been the practice to grant power of attorney laws for more than 100 years. This usually happens in the way that the relevant law includes a power of attorney for the King (government) or a ministry to issue further rules, which are then often given the status of regulations.

The development towards an increasingly complicated society and the state's growing influence has led to increased use of power of attorney laws. Many laws give the King or a ministry the competence to issue rules that complement the law, such as rules of a technical nature. An example is the Working Environment Act, which in §1-2 (4) authorizes the King (Government) to issue rules that parts of the public administration shall be exempted from the Act. Pursuant to this power of attorney provision, the King (Government) has made exceptions from the Working Environment Act for a number of public enterprises. For example, the King (government) has issued a regulation that exempts police officers from the working time rules in the Working Environment Act.

The question of the constitutionality of power of attorney laws has in some cases been brought before the courts, but the Supreme Court has so far not set aside any law on the grounds that the Storting has exceeded its right to delegate legislative authority. Where the border goes according to the Constitution is uncertain.

In the spring of 2020, the Storting restricted a bill from the government that would have given the government a general authority to make changes to all Norwegian laws in connection with the corona pandemic. The Corona Act passed on 24 March 2020 is nevertheless an example of a particularly far-reaching power of attorney law. Another example is the Emergency Preparedness Act."

The corona law
"The hand alcohol was in place in the Storting hall ahead of the debate on the Corona Act on 21 March 2020. In the background, Prime Minister Erna Solberg is ready.
The Corona Act was a temporary power of attorney law. The law gave the government authority to adopt regulations that supplemented, supplemented or deviated from 62 laws to remedy the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020.

The government issued 32 regulations based on the law. For five of the regulations, proposals were submitted by a sufficient minority in the Storting so that parts of the regulations did not enter into force.

The law was passed on 24 March 2020 and entered into force on 27 March the same year. The law was renewed once and was repealed on 27 May 2020.

The full title of the Act is: Temporary Act on regulatory authority to remedy the consequences of outbreaks of Covid-19 etc. (coronal law)

The Government's regulatory competence includes 62 laws (§ 2).
The Government can only change rules in law if this cannot be done through normal legislation in the Storting (§ 1).
The duration of the Act and the regulations applies for one month (§ 7).
One third of the members of the Storting may order the Government to repeal all or part of a regulation issued pursuant to the Act (§§ 4 and 5).
In regulations, the Government may not restrict access to judicial review of regulations issued pursuant to the Act (§ 6).

The government's measures to prevent the spread of the Covid-19 virus on 12 March 2020 had serious consequences for the population, the business community and society in general. To remedy these consequences, the Storting adopted a number of measures on 16 March to limit the economic and social harmful effects. However, a number of measures could require a legal basis in the form of exceptions to or supplementation of current legislation.

The Government pointed out that the Government's existing powers in the legislation, for example in the Communicable Diseases Act, did not provide a sufficient basis for implementing necessary measures. Examples of possible measures that could require rule changes were redistribution of labor, orders to the municipalities to provide social assistance to the self-employed and freelancers and measures to facilitate the settlement of cases in the courts. The crisis situation was also confusing and could require measures that the legislation has not taken into account. The Government emphasized that in such a crisis situation there could be a need for rapid rule changes, and that parliamentary deliberations would make this difficult. On 18 March 2020, the government presented a bill on a general regulatory authority in connection with the coronavirus pandemic (Prop. 56 L (2019-2020)).

The bill:

The Government's bill provided that the Government should be given a general authority to issue regulations that supplement, supplement or deviate from current legislation as far as was necessary to remedy the negative consequences of the outbreak of Covid-19. The law and regulations were to have a duration of six months.

The bill was otherwise based on the same reading as a previous proposal for a general emergency preparedness authority (NOU 2019: 13 When the crisis occurs). As a security mechanism against abuse, the bill opened the way for a minority in the Storting, with at least a third of the votes, to completely or partially repeal regulations passed by the government. The regulations should also not be able to deviate from rules in the Constitution and must be in accordance with international human rights protected in the Human Rights Act.

Criticism of the bill:

The bill was in part strongly criticized by lawyers and in the press for giving the government too extensive powers to change laws and thus break with the distribution of power and guarantees of legal certainty.
Parliamentary deliberations and legislative decisions

The bill was considered by the Storting's special committee to deal with special cases concerning the corona crisis. The processing of the law took place in the fastest possible way according to the Constitution, which requires two legislative decisions at least three days apart.

On 19 March, the committee requested a legal assessment of the bill from five professors of law (Terje Einarsen, Hans Petter Graver, Eirik Holmøyvik, Benedikte Moltumyr Høgberg and Eivind Smith), as well as the Bar Association, the Judges' Association and the Norwegian Institute for Human Rights. All assessments recommended changes to the bill to limit the scope of the government's powers and strengthen the Storting's control.

On 21 March, the committee delivered a unanimous recommendation (Recommendation 204 L (2019-2020)). The committee recommended the government's bill, but proposed several important changes that limited the government's powers and strengthened the Storting's control:

The Government's regulatory competence was objectively reduced to 62 laws (§ 2).
The law emphasizes that the government can only change rules in law if this can not be done through normal legislation in the Storting (§ 1).
The duration of the Act and the regulations was reduced from six months to one month (§ 7).
Amendments that make it practically easier for a third of the members of the Storting to order the government to repeal all or part of a regulation issued pursuant to the Act (§§ 4 and 5).
The law emphasizes that the government in regulations cannot restrict access to judicial review of regulations issued pursuant to the law (§ 6).

On the same day, the Storting unanimously passed the law on the basis of the committee's recommendation. The second and final legislative decision was made unanimously on March 24. The law was sanctioned in the cabinet on March 27 and entered into force on the same day.

At the same time, the Storting passed a new provision in the Storting's Rules of Procedure (§ 50 a) to ensure rapid and efficient Storting processing of notifications from the Government of regulations issued pursuant to the Corona Act.
Extension and revocation

The Corona Act and the regulations issued pursuant to the Act had a duration of one month, ie until 27 April 2020. The Storting decided on 21 April to extend the duration of the Act by one month until 27 May. On this date, the law and regulations issued pursuant to the law were automatically repealed."

"The controversy over the proxy laws refers to the political controversy that arose in Norway in the period after 1945 about the many proposals for new proxy laws that were put forward in the Storting. That is, laws where the Storting delegates its authority to the government and administration.

During this period, Norway was in a reconstruction phase after the Second World War, and public administration was growing strongly. This growth, as well as an ongoing politicization of the administration, meant that such laws were considered necessary. At the same time, the opposition (including the Conservatives) was concerned about how these laws could come into conflict with the interests of democracy and the rule of law and the elected representatives' control over the administration.

The controversy culminated in the violent confrontations over the proposals for the price and rationalization laws in 1952. They represented largely the same comprehensive powers that had been put forward in Lex Thagaard. That is, the arrangement that had given the Price Directorate extensive powers to regulate Norwegian business and industry, prepared by the Norwegian government in exile in London during the last phase of World War II.

It was during the controversy over the price and rationalization laws that the highly respected Professor Johs. Andenæs found it necessary to warn against an excessive use of power of attorney laws:

"The Power of Attorney Act can be used as a means of actually putting the democratic constitutional system out of action. This was the case in Germany when the Riksdag in a law of 24 March 1933 generally decided that laws in addition to the way prescribed by the constitution, could also be decided by the government […] The power of attorney was here a form chosen to give the transition from democracy to dictatorship an apparent legality ».

The dispute subsided fairly quickly as both parties granted licenses to the other. At the same time, what we can call a constitutional reform was initiated to ensure control of the administration. Among other things, it was to consist of the establishment of a Storting ombudsman for public administration in 1962, the new Public Administration Act in 1967 and the Public Access to Information Act in 1970.

The battle begins:

One of the early topics of contention concerned a law that gave the government and administration free rein to regulate all economic relations with foreign countries. Opposition spokesman John Lyng expressed strong displeasure. He proposed a time limit for the law and stated that: "The very general power of attorney that the two bills that are now available can, if necessary, be defended under completely extraordinary conditions."

Other cases were the Employment Act, which in the original proposal stated that "no able-bodied citizen should be able to leave the country without the consent of the Directorate of Labor". Exactly this passage was, however, withdrawn before consideration in the Storting.

1947 was a year of strife. The government then presented the first national budget, which in reality was a planned economy program. That was disputed. But the biggest controversy was over the price and rationalization issues, as Lex Thagaard, which was a temporary arrangement from the last phase of the war, was to be followed up by a temporary law, Lex Brofoss, with about the same broad powers as in Lex Thagaard.

Again, it was Lyng who represented the opposition. He claimed, among other things, that democracy could be undermined if "important decisions were moved from the open, free forum, where the opposition has certain rights, to decisions behind closed doors and rolled down curtains in the administration's offices".

He also claimed that the proposal provided a basis for such a serious encroachment on the rights of individuals that […] there can be doubt about its constitutionality ». The law was passed with a time limit of one year at the same time as a commission was appointed with LO's lawyer, Gustav Sjaastad, as chairman and Thagaard as a member, who was to submit a proposal for a permanent law. It would take a few years before the proposal was presented in 1952.

The Emergency Laws:

There was also a strong dispute over the proposal for emergency preparedness laws. Such a proposal was made in the autumn of 1950 after the outbreak of the Korean War when the Cold War was at its most threatening. It contained provisions on access to detention without court proceedings, on press censorship, on summary proceedings in special courts and on the introduction of the death penalty.

The laws should be able to enter into force "during war, when war threatens or when the independence or security of the kingdom is in danger as a result of ongoing or threatening hostilities between foreign states or for other reasons". It was not least the last passage "or for other reasons" that triggered a storm of protests. It was almost a blank power of attorney.

It must now be emphasized that the Storting's consent had to be obtained - if possible. However, it was predicted that this was not always possible during war or in other threatening situations. These were thus "emergency powers" for the government in special situations.

The reaction to the proposals was fierce. The well-known author Sigurd Hoel wrote that the government had turned its back on the Norwegian constitution and everything that can be called free democratic rule of law, and marching into the broad main road of the dictatorship. " The Conservatives had been hesitantly critical, but ended up going against the proposition "as it reminded too much of popular democratic conditions."

The case ended with the proposition being withdrawn and a new one drafted which only gave a general authority to the government to take the necessary measures in the threatening situations. The listing of what "the necessary measures" could be was thus omitted. It can be discussed whether the final law meant a greater degree of legal certainty.

The prices and rationalization laws:

The second major controversy came when the proposals for price and rationalization laws were presented in 1952. Here it was proposed that several of the far-reaching powers of attorney from Lex Thagaard and Lex Brofoss should be included in permanent laws. The strongest opposition to the bills came from the Information Office for the Price and Rationalization Acts, which had been established by the business organizations.

The problem of whether the comprehensive powers were compatible with the constitution reappeared. In reality, the case was decided by a judgment in the Supreme Court plenary ahead of the political dispute. Specifically, the case concerned fees that were imposed on the Norwegian whaling companies for price regulation purposes and on the basis of the preliminary laws.

It was claimed that the Storting could not delegate its taxing authority in this way. However, the Supreme Court found that the constitutionality was in order despite the fact that "delegation of authority to impose taxes on citizens in this case goes far further than in any previous case in peacetime".

At the same time as the Supreme Court gave full legitimacy to the Labor Party's proxy policy, it seems, however, that the Labor Party itself developed an increasing skepticism of the same policy. When it came down to it, the Social Democratic government chose not to put forward the proposal for a rationalization law. It promoted and adopted only a modified version of the proposed price law. Then the case calmed down.

Andenæs could summarize the situation as follows: «Before the adoption of the permanent price law this year, one could say that the entire economic regulatory legislation practically only consisted of blank powers for the administration to make the general and individual provisions it found necessary or appropriate. The new price law here denotes a turnaround, a reaction to what I think one must be able to describe as a tendency to slip ».

Reforms for control of the administration:

As early as 1951, the government had appointed an administrative commission under the leadership of Supreme Court Judge Terje Wold (former Minister of Justice and later Supreme Court Justice) to look, among other things, at the control problems in connection with the power of attorney legislation. The point was that with the strong growth in the state administration, the use of power of attorney laws had become necessary. However, they undermined the courts' traditional control over the administration, which affected the rule of law. So the question was how to develop reassuring forms of administrative practice?

The Wold Commission, in turn, led to three important organizational innovations; the establishment of a Storting ombudsman for public administration (the civil ombudsman) in 1962, the new Public Administration Act in 1967 and the Public Access to Information Act in 1970. At the ombudsman, anyone could appeal administrative decisions. Among other things, the Public Administration Act required the public administration to obtain consultation statements from the parties who would be affected by an administrative decision. This meant, as was said, the introduction of court procedures in the administration, and the Public Access to Information Act opened up for critical insight into the decision-making processes in the administration.

In most countries it is natural to compare with, there are separate administrative courts. We do not have that in Norway, but there have gradually been many court-like bodies within the administration. All this was intended to promote the rule of law and democracy. It can be said that these reforms represented important parts of the social democratic constitution for a strong state.

The dispute over the power of attorney laws had ideological overtones that explain the intensity of the confrontations. The Liberal Party's Lars Ramdal could thus ask in the Storting whether it was the intention to regulate himself into "a different social order than the one we have today?" The Labor Party's Olav Meisdalshagen gave him the right: "This is exactly where the principled struggle in society itself stands."

Others, such as the Labor Party's Erik Brofoss, on the other hand, thought that it was all a question of appropriateness. In any case, it is remarkable how the parties approached each other in the closing phase so that it all calmed down. It is not unreasonable to claim that the spirit of tolerance that can be found in the Joint Program from 1945 did not really manifest itself until 1953."

So Norway has been a dictatorship from the 1950`s, pretending to be a democracy, just about twenty years after WW2 started! Human right activist, lawyer and judge, Anine Kieruf mention it in After words in the translated to Norwegian 1984 book(I have the original English version and the translated):
In the years around 1950, there was a dispute over the power of attorney laws
- laws passed by the Storting, but with broad powers that the government and administration could adopt the content that was appropriate at any time. It was especially the emergency laws, a type of emergency law that was to come into force "during war, when war threatens the kingdom, when the kingdom's independence or security is in danger due to ongoing or threatening hostilities between foreign states or for other reasons", which were controversial. One thing was the exceptional situation that occurred during war, but the emergency laws gave the government and the administration very broad powers to make exceptions from basic rule of law guarantees not only in war situations, but also for "other reasons". If the government itself considered that these unspecified "other reasons" occurred, it could, in violation of the Constitution, detain people without court proceedings, in violation of the protection of freedom of expression conduct censorship, conduct summary proceedings in special courts and impose the death penalty. The author Sigurd Hoel believed that the government with the emergency laws turned its back on the Norwegian constitution and everything that can be called a free democratic rule of law, and marched into the dictatorship's broad main road. In principle, it is not difficult to agree with this. With it is obviously easier to forget.
In the debate on the Price and Rationing Act, which gave extensive powers to regulate the administration of Norwegian business and industry, it was the opposition, led by Conservative John Lyng and lawyer Johs. Andenæs who filled the memory hole about the power of attorney laws' own history: Such laws could be used as a means of putting the democratic constitutional system out of action. This was, as Andenæs said, the case in Germany when the Riksdag in a law of 24 March 1933 generally decided that laws, in addition to the manner prescribed by the administration, could also be decided by the government. In Germany, the power of attorney was the form chosen to give the transition from democracy to dictatorship an apparent legality.
If not Germany in 1933, then in Norway almost twenty years later: In the service of the good cause, all with the best intentions. And in both cases, the power of attorney was justified by the existence - perceived or real - of an external enemy against whom all means could be used to preserve their own society, their own peace. War is peace. Or vice versa.
I also added original text:
I årene omkring 1950 stod striden om fullmaktslovene
- lover vedtatt av Stortinget, men med vide fullmakter til at regjering og forvaltning kunne vedta det innhold som til enhver tid passet. Det var særlig beredskapslovene, en type nødlover som skulle tre i kraft "under krig, når krig truer eller når rikets selvstendighet eller sikkerhet er i fare som følge av pågående eller truende fiendtligheter mellom fremmede stater eller av andre grunner", som var kontroversielle. En ting var unntakssituasjonen som inntraff ved krig, men beredskapslovene gav regjering og forvaltningn svært vide fullmakter til å gjøre unntak fra grunnleggende rettsstatsgarantier ikke bare i krigssituasjoner, men også av "andre grunner". Om regjeringen selv vurderte det slik at disse ikke nærmere spesifiserte "andre grunner" inntraff, kunne den i strid med Grunnloven internere folk uten domstolsbehandling, i strid med ytringsfrihetsbeskyttelsen drive pressesensur, forestå summarisk rettergang ved spesialdomstoler og innføre dødsstraff. Forfatteren Sigurd Hoel mente regjeringen med beredskapslovene snudde ryggen til norsk grunnlov og alt som kan kalles fri demokratisk rettsstat, og marsjerte inn på diktaturets brede hovedvei. Det er i prinsippet ikke vanskelig å være enig i dette. Men det er åpenbart lettere å glemme.
I debatten om pris- og rasjoneringsloven, som gav omfattende fullmakter til forvaltningsregulering av norsk næringsliv, var det opposisjonen, med Høyres John Lyng i spissen og juristen Johs. Andenæs som fylte minnehullet om fullmaktslovenes egen historie: Slike lover kunne brukes som middel til å sette det demokratiske forfatningssystem ut av virksomhet. Dette var, som Andenæs sa, tilfellet i Tyskland da Riksdagen i en lov av 24. mars 1933 generelt bestemte at lover, foruten på den måten som forvaltningen foreskrev, også kunne besluttes av regjeringen. I Tyskland var fullmakten formen som ble valgt for å gi overgangen fra demokrati til diktatur en tilsynelatende legalitet.
Om ikke Tyskland i 1933, så i Norge knapt tyve år senere: I den gode saks tjeneste , alt med de beste hensikter. Og i begge tilfeller var fullmakten berettiget av eksistensen - fornemmet eller reel - av en ytre fiende mot hvem alle midler måtte kunne tas i bruk for å bevare eget samfunn, egen fred. Krig er fred. Eller omvendt.
This "other reasons" works well in a fake pandemic... As Max say:
The plan is 50 years in the making
User avatar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon May 11, 2020 8:36 pm
Has thanked: 1044 times
Been thanked: 446 times

Re: Lockdown and the "new normal" in Scandinavia

Post by bean »

An excellent article written by G. Hasnes, Master of Science in Engineering, November 9, 2020 for Resett.no

The totalitarian virus and the great reset

"In the history of stupidity of human beings, active stupidity has done more harm than passive stupidity. The worst of all stupidity is the totalitarian. The Western world is now actively pursuing totalitarianism.

In the previous article on the unbearably stupid UN's sustainability goals, we saw that it's all about the United Nations' strangely desperate fight against life on earth, namely the CO2 emissions that we need to maintain the world's plant life. All the goals revolve around the political mantra 'sustainability', this frightening and meaningless term that can justify anything of totalitarian and supranational measures against the population. Sustainability is synonymous with being less dependent on CO2, is just as sick as saying that people become more sustainable when they are less dependent on oxygen.

The face masks that are supposed to 'protect' against the spread of the Covid-19 virus are just as effective for this as setting up a wide net fence to prevent mosquitoes from coming and stinging you when you sit out on the veranda in the evening. The masks have a greater width than the size of the virus, which flies happily to and from and enjoys the freedom to multiply and spread. A face masks against Covid infection is like splitting a broken bone with just a bandage.

In some boxes it is even explicitly written that the bandages do not protect against Covid-19. They provide false security, but people who are driven into fear do not think rationally and cannot be argued with. They firmly believe that they are doing the right thing because they follow our totalitarian politicians. They do not take the time to think and investigate when it is required to wear a face mask that does not actually work against the spread of infection. In addition, it turns out that face masks are also the opposite of safe. The sanitary face masks carry and collect infection, and prevent natural breathing.

And what's worse: The safest function of the face masks is to prevent you from getting enough oxygen.

An absolute medical contraindication:

Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson MD, PhD is a neurologist and neurophysiologist with a doctorate in pharmacology, with a special interest in neurotoxicology, environmental medicine, neurogeneration and neuroplasticity, the brain's ability to repair itself. This is what she has to say about masks and their effect on our brain:

"Inhaling our exhaled air [using a face mask] will undoubtedly create a lack of oxygen and a flood of carbon dioxide. We know that the human brain is very sensitive to oxygen degradation. For example, there are nerve cells in the hippocampus that can be no longer without oxygen for more than three minutes; then they cannot survive.
The acute warning symptoms are headache, drowsiness, dizziness, difficulty concentrating, slowing down the reaction time of the cognitive system.

But: When you have chronic oxygen deprivation, all these symptoms disappear because you get used to them. However, your efficiency will remain impaired and the undersupply of oxygen in your brain will continue to develop.

We know that it takes years to decades to develop neurodegenerative diseases. If you forget your phone number today, the breakdown in your brain would have already started 20 or 30 years ago.

While you think you have become accustomed to wearing your mask and breathing again your own exhaled air, the degenerative processes in your brain are intensified as the lack of oxygen continues.

The second problem is that the nerve cells in your brain are unable to divide normally. So in case our governments generously allow themselves to get rid of the masks and return to breathing oxygen freely in a few months, the lost nerve cells will no longer be regenerated. What is gone is gone.

I do not use a mask, I need my brain to think. I want a clear head when dealing with my patients, and not be in carbon dioxide-induced anesthesia.

This is not an unfounded medical exception to face masks because lack of oxygen is dangerous for every brain. It must be everyone's free decision whether to use a mask that is completely ineffective in protecting itself against a virus.

For children and young people, masks are an absolute no-no. Children and adolescents have an extremely active and adaptive immune system, and they need a constant interaction with the earth's microbiome. Their brain is also incredibly active, as it has so much to learn. The child's brain, or adolescent's brain thirsts for oxygen. The more metabolically active the organ is, the more oxygen it requires. In children and adolescents, each organ is metabolically active.

Depriving a child or adolescent of the brain of oxygen, or restricting it in any way, is not only dangerous to health, it is completely criminal. Lack of oxygen inhibits brain development, and the damage that has occurred as a result CANNOT be reversed.

The child needs the brain to learn, and the brain needs oxygen to function. We do not need a clinical study for that. This is simple, undeniable physiology. Lack of oxygen induced consciously and intentionally is an absolutely conscious health hazard, and an absolute medical contraindication.

An absolute medical contraindication in medicine indicates that this medicine, this treatment, this method or the measure should not be used, is not allowed to use. In order to force an entire population to use an absolute medical contraindication by force, there must be clear and serious reasons for this, and the reasons must be presented to competent interdisciplinary and independent bodies that will verify and authorize this.

When dementia in ten years' time will increase exponentially, and the younger generations will not be able to reach their God-given potential, it will not help to say "we did not need the masks".

It is also a myth that corona outbreaks come in waves, says NTNU professor

How can a veterinarian, a software distributor, a businessman, an electric car manufacturer and a physicist decide on the health of the entire population? Please, ladies and gentlemen, we must all wake up.

I know how harmful oxygen degradation is to the brain, cardiologists know it to the heart, pulmonologists know it to the lungs. Lack of oxygen damages every organ.

Where are the health departments, the health insurance, the medical association? It had been their duty to stand firm against the shutdown and to stop it and stop it from the very beginning.

Why do medical boards punish doctors who give people exceptions? Does the person or doctor have to seriously prove that oxygen deprivation harms people? What kind of medical science do our doctors and medical associations represent?

Who is responsible for this crime? Those who want to enforce it? Those who let it happen and play together, or those who do not prevent it?

It's not about masks, it's not about viruses, it's certainly not about your health. It's about much much more. I'm not participating. I am not afraid.

You may notice that they are already taking our air to breathe. The most important thing now is personal responsibility. We are responsible for what we believe, not the media. We are responsible for what we do, not our superiors. We are responsible for our own health, not the World Health Organization. And we are responsible for what happens in our country, not the government. "
The original video that was on youtube has already been taken down because it violates youtube's guidelines. Are you surprised?

Under the pretext of protecting us from a virus, the use of ineffective face masks is required worldwide. The only thing the face masks do is to give false security to people who fear the virus, and to have a symbolic effect where they tell that the people submit to the irrational authorities.

The totalitarian:

According to Store Norske Leksikon, totalitarianism, totalitarianism or totalitarian regime "is a term for political systems where the authorities in principle control all activity in society, even what takes place in the family." and “In practice, full totalitarianism is hardly possible, partly because it would require too large a control apparatus, and partly because it presupposes an ability to control and coordinate activities in society that do not exist and are even difficult to conceive. Totalitarianism is therefore more of a theoretical than an actual existing phenomenon. ”

Store Norske Leksikon did not foresee that if you get people out of the rational state and into the state of fear combined with voluntary monitoring of others, then it will be easy to introduce the totalitarian. Even such a free-thinking people as Norwegians have given in to the totalitarian authorities and obey obediently whether it is about how many are allowed to go on a child's birthday or how far a father can follow his 7-year-old into the school grounds. You guessed it. He has to stop at the school gate.

Financial analyst Martin Armstrong writes daily about the phenomena surrounding the closure of most Western societies. Not only does he talk about how small businesses go bankrupt worldwide and how riots and looting are spreading and crowds are demonstrating against the corona measures, something we do not see in the state-funded media, but he also tells that the corona measures have been introduced to cope with and to reduce CO2 emissions to zero by putting power behind the introduction of sustainability goals.

The Great Reset:

This says Armstrong is caused by a plan, about The Great Reset, and he has even written a thick book describing this. The reset is not content with the use of force behind the closure of eye and gas production, which is actually completely unlikely for ordinary sensible people, but which we see the majority of Norwegian politicians embrace with joy, every day. It even talks about how this, in turn, should be a 'sustainable' measure to reduce the world's population considerably. It justifies how the sustainability goal of equality is to be fulfilled by everyone receiving the same minimum income from the State, at the same time as the State moves in and takes over all property. It tells how the fear of the Corona virus will make the population accept vaccines that include markers that can later be read so that you know if you have been vaccinated so that you can travel by plane. The state's monitoring and control will be total.

The idea for The Great Reset comes from the World Economic Forum, where Norwegian politicians have been eager participants for many years. You can read for yourself on their own page about the reset, but you have to read between the lines. The description of the Great Reset is wrapped in the usual swaddling of swollen words and phrases. You need to know what is behind the words, just as you need to know what is really behind the 'sustainability goals'.

Today's coronavirus is a mutation, and mutations of viruses occur continuously. If you are vaccinated today (if there was a vaccine) then new coronavirus will occur, just as new influenza viruses occur continuously. Thus, a new vaccine will be needed, so these dreams that a vaccine will come and save us all from disease, are pure nonsense. On the other hand, vaccines are among the most lucrative deals that exist as governments have a willingness to pay to pour billions on such things without it being proven that it has any benefit.

But paying Bill Gates billions for vaccine development, as Prime Minister Solberg did earlier this year, can only be compared with Norway's billions in payments to the Clinton Foundation in recent years. They have no other effect than that politicians can go to the covered table for the rest of their lives.

What protects against Covid-19?
Many viruses do not have a vaccine against them, such as the common cold. There are actually billions of viruses in your body, so when you e.g. feeling cravings for sweets it is the virus that sends signals to your brain to take in more sugar. Viruses attack primarily where there is a weakened immune system. Recent studies show a link between vitamin D deficiency and severe Covid-19 infection. Christ Masterjohn has written extensively in English that sufficient amounts of vitamin D in the body reduce the risk of serious consequences of the viral infection. You should buy vitamin D tablets at the pharmacy and not face masks at all. It also helps if you eat well with vitamin C daily.

The Swedes did not shut down the country, and went in to achieve herd immunity. Their numbers show that virtually no one under the age of 50 has died of or with the virus, and then the numbers increase gently with age. The most interesting points are that even among those over 80 who are affected, the vast majority survive, and deaths are predominantly related to the fact that the health of those who die is already greatly reduced, with up to several parallel disorders. It has also been pointed out that the average life expectancy of those who die from Covid-19 is higher than the average life expectancy of the entire population.

Covid-19 has the same function as the flu. Every year there is a virus epidemic that primarily affects the elderly and the already ill. Every year, about 1,000 Norwegians die when the flu reaches them and they are already ill.

Children and young people have zero chance of becoming ill if they are otherwise generally healthy. In fact, they have a minimal chance of becoming infected even if they are in contact with the source of the infection. If you are under 60 and otherwise healthy, the chance of getting sick is in line with the flu. People at risk due to age and / or health are given special care.

Covid-19 is not totalitarian, because it can not command you to destroy yourself voluntarily - as the sugar virus often does - and it feels good to be hindered in its function by your immune system.

On the other hand, totalitarian ideology is a totalitarian virus that infects the politicians' brains and activists and everyone who dreams of and thirsts for power and where their spiritual immune system has not taken enough vitamins of humility.

The totalitarians and their lies:

All history shows that it is stupid, foolish and destructive to be totalitarian. It is not sustainable, you could actually say that it is not 'sustainable' in the long run. Sooner or later the totalitarian rulers were overthrown and often by violent revolution. For it is useless to stop climate change and it is useless to get the people to plunge themselves into destruction without them getting anything in return. And unemployment, lack of freedom, lack of money and food shortages and a wealth of prohibitions do not lead to apathy, but to rebellion.

I now know that everything the authorities claim about climate change is a lie and propaganda, so I gradually also understand that everything the authorities claim about Covid-19 is a lie and propaganda, and then it may happen that they sometimes say something that may be true, but then it is taken out of context. For they have shut down society out of self-interest, and not for you and me, and they have done irreparable damage to the Western world. It's not over at all, The Great Reset has only just begun."

https://resett.no/2020/11/09/det-totali ... tillingen/
Post Reply