California Gov. Gavin Newsom, despite facing a recall this fall, is reportedly moving forward with plans to roll out a “vaccine verification system” for private businesses to verify that their customers have been injected for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19).
Even though medical information is supposed to remain private, Newsom wants corporations and businesses to be able to demand vaccination proof before customers are allowed to shop. This is outlined in Newsom’s latest mask guidance, which points to coming-soon vaccine passports.
The Golden State is asking that all unvaccinated residents continue to wear a mask while indoors, though all other restrictions, including “stay-at-home” orders and business capacity limits, have been fully lifted.
As of now, California businesses have three choices when it comes to handling unmasked customers and patrons: use the honor system and trust that unmasked customers are vaccinated; “implement vaccine verification”; or require that all customers wear a mask.
Masks are useless and harmful, as are the “vaccines,” but Newsom is doing his best to try to force them on people at the point of a gun, if needed, to keep everyone “safe.”
Newsom wants Californians to get Mark of the Beast in order to eat
In the event that Newsom actually tries to implement a “papers, please” type of program throughout California, many are already planning to forge vaccination cards or other paperwork to continue to be able to eat without having to first alter their DNA.
Because of this, Newsom is considering making some kind of smartphone app or perhaps an injectable chip that can be scanned as proof of injection, allowing a person to buy and sell as “normal.”
“As it relates to technology and the tools of technology, there are opportunities to make available different strategies to provide a more secure, safe, and transparent form of verification,” Newsom is quoted as saying.
Seeing as how all Chinese Virus injection doses are already recorded in state or county electronic vaccine registries, it would not be impossible for California to implement some kind of electronic method of verification, assuming businesses wanted to use them.
Most probably would not, as it would take away from business, but others might – at least until they are sued for medical discrimination. After all, there are people out there who are medically unable to take any injections, and who are also unable to wear a mask.
These people would need to be reasonably accommodated in the same way as other customers without being made to feel like second-class citizens. That is a tall order when it comes to so-called “vaccine passports,” so it will be somewhat amusing to see a handful of them try before having to face the music, legally speaking.
Nevertheless, Newsom is moving forward with the plan regardless, though he insists that there is “no mandate, no requirement, no passport” associated with his little scheme, and that the whole thing is “voluntary” – until it is suddenly no longer voluntary, that is.
This is what happened with face masks last year, as you may recall. It started off “voluntary” in many areas and quickly became a “mandate” to keep everyone “safe” from Chinese Germs.
Conservative-leaning Orange County has been aggressively fighting Newsom’s electronic verification system, with local activists showing up to numerous recent Board of Supervisors meetings to protest against it. Any type of vaccine verification system infringes on personal privacy, they explained, which successfully got the issue tabled, at least for now.
“Whenever I read stuff like this, it reminds me of the beginning of this and how it all started based on lies,” wrote one commenter at The New American.
“The CDC’s own documents affirm that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated, that there is no gold standard for testing, and that the RT-PCR tests have high cycle thresholds to give 97% false positives with the disclaimer that the results do not confirm the presence, or absence of the virus.”
The latest news about Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) vaccine tyranny can be found at ChemicalViolence.com.
Sources for this article include: