The Highwire with Del Bigtree - FRENCH BILL SEEKS TO CRIMINALIZE MEDICAL “MISINFORMATION”

Episode Date: March 3, 2024

Press and medical journalists appear to be the target of a new bill proposed in France that may seek to criminalize criticism of therapeutic and prophylactic remedies that have been deemed safe by the medical community.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

As we're all navigating this post-COVID world, conversations that used to be not really mainstream narratives, like informed consent and some of the problems surrounding all-out vaccine mandates and legal issues are now top stories. So we're going to go through some of those now that are top stories. And one of them, really one of the top stories is this legal issue, a law that's going through the National Assembly and the Senate in France. This is the reporting from the Brownstone Institute. and they write this. France's Pfizer amendment could turn MRI critics into criminals. There's a lot of people talking about this online and a lot of reporting on it.

Some good, some not so good. So let's just go right to the bill. And this is a translated bill. So some of this stuff may be lost in translation. But we're going to read right from it here and then break it down. Provocation to abandon. Article 4. Provocation to abandon or abstain from following therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment

is punishable by one year of imprisonment. and a fine of 15,000 euros. When this abandonment or abstination is presented as beneficial for health of the person's targeted when it is in the state of medical knowledge, clearly likely to result in serious consequences for their physical or psychological health, taking into account the pathology from which they suffer. Now it goes on, and there's one more line here.

It says, when the provocation provided for, in the first two paragraphs, has been followed by effects, meaning someone actually had a problem because they followed that, the penalties are increased to three years. years of imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros. And then it goes on to talk about when these offenses are committed through the written or audiovisual press. So there's specific provisions that also happen. So they're actually talking about the press in here. They're talking about the media, written media, audiovisual media. So let's break this down a little bit. Let me just get this,

let me make sense of this for a second. We are an audio visual press. We, for instance, have definitely pointed out the dangers of the COVID vaccine. As I've pointed out, we were right. We were right small or rare, whatever it is, we were right that there's an increased risk of harm from the vaccine. What this law is saying is that if me or you or people like us put out information saying that we believe this prophylactic product called the COVID-19 vaccine is dangerous or whatever vaccine comes during the next pandemic, that if we make those statements, I would guess that perhaps I could fly into France and be immediately arrested. And now I'm only going to get one year. I'm going to get one year of arrest and I think a $15,000 fine as long as it didn't affect anybody. But if they can find somebody that wash the high wire and say that they ended up, let's say, dying from COVID or getting really sick or something like that, that that is now my fault and that now I should go to jail for three years and pay a $45,000 fine.

Do I have that straight? Is that? And it's not just prophylactic, right? Like remdesivir or treatment. If someone doesn't take remdesivir and dies of COVID, doesn't matter how many people died of remdesivir. If the medical establishment believes remdesivir works, then I'm going to jail. You might overstayed that? There's a lot of ins and outs on this bill.

And it's actually double speak because it says from a pathology from which they suffer. So a medical treatment, someone's suffering from medical treatment. But they also say prophylactic. So prophylactic is intended to prevent disease. So they get it on both ends. But they also, I mean, to your point, SSRI is for depression, chemotherapy for cancer, statins for high cholesterol. Where does this end? If I'm a pharmaceutical company, I'm loving this bill.

Now, let's stop right here. A lot of people are saying this is law now. It's happening. It's not law. It's passed a National Assembly. It's going to the Senate. There could be rewrites. The Senate may not pass it.

They didn't pass it the first time it had to go through a rewrite. And it has to do all that before it becomes law. So this is kind of a preempt of putting it on people's radar. And we really want to pay attention to this. I want to bring up, you know, Jeffrey, I think about this because, you know, when I was just on the Dr. Drew show recently, we're having a really intense debate about exactly this. You know, if medical doctors can't speak out, if laws like this are getting passed. By the way, McCrone in France is one of the darlings of the WEF. This is that globalist agenda through WHO treaties and all that this is where they want to go.

They want America right behind this. I was just up in Canada where they're having issues just like this, laws that are coming down the pipe. But I want to play this clip from Dr. Drew talking about the moment he woke up to what happens if you don't go along with the medical consensus, even when you know it's wrong. Take a look at this. At a time where, you know, with all the computers and all the files, we should be able to track people better and deal with them on a personal basis.

Instead, everything's becoming more and more of a one-size-fits-all. and I'll be honest, all of these laws that are, you know, taking people's rights away. You're also taking away like a second opinion. As far as I can tell, if all doctors, as you're saying, are only employees. And essentially, the dictates sort of seems to be coming from regulatory agencies that are, you know, seem to be taken over by the pharmaceutical industry. And so it just sort of trickles down. Look no further than the opioid crisis.

Right. That was your model for what happened in COVID. Same thing happened. evangelizing physicians became convinced that pain should never be experienced in America ever again and that anybody who wasn't using as many opioids as possible was, quote, opiophobic and was guilty of patient abuse, not malpractice, a criminal act for which the lawyers love that, jumped all over it, a criminal action of patient abuse. So we started seeing doctors go to prison and get gigantic fines.

for inadequate not giving enough opiates. That's amazing. That's exactly what we're looking at in this law, isn't it, Jeffrey? Where they're saying if a patient is sick and you don't use the treatment being recommended by the pharmaceutical industry that owns your regulatory agency, doctors are going to jail. It's already happened in the United States of America, not France, right here in the United States of America this is taking place.

And God forbid we get to this place where journalists like you and I point out studies coming from all over the world, If our president says you have to take this vaccine and we believe it's good for you, then they're now going to say that you are should be arrested, that you are a terrorist, that you are putting people at risk. It used to be called the scientific method. I guess that's going to be illegal now. The whole opioid story was such a teachable moment for anybody wants to go back.

Pharmaceutical companies, it should be clear by now, we'll do almost anything to get their products protected and put upon a population. Thank you.