Is Criticism Of mRNA Shots In France Illegal?

It's actually worse than you think

Feb 15, 2024

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice, speak with a legal professional.

La Chaîne parlementaire (LCP) [translated: The Parliamentary Chain] are a French national public news channel established by French parliamentary decree back in 1999. They’re currently known by the name “LCP-Assemblée nationale” [translated: LCP-National Assembly].

They recently reported that the French parliament passed a law prohibiting ‘crime of incitement to forego care’.

It is part of the [translated] “draft law to strengthen the fight against sectarian abuses and improve the support of victims”, couched in the usual tyrannical justification wording.

Tyranny Of The “Anti-Cult”

This title refers to the so-called “Article 4” being debated in the French National Assembly. It is their version of a censorship bill relating to COVID-19, and had been discussed previously.

The French term for so-called “misinformation” is bizarrely called “sectarian excesses” and “drift” (also “sectarian aberrations”). A ‘sect’ is another word for ‘cult’. It is defined in France’s ironically named Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights of 1789.

The French president created the organisation ‘MIVILUDES’ (Mission interministérielle de vigilance et de lutte contre les dérives sectaires [translated: Interministerial Mission of Vigilance and Combat against Sectarian Drifts]) in 2002, which they claim is to investigate and combat cults, or sects.

Jehovah’s Witnesses filed lawsuit against MIVILUDES for their use of ‘bad methodology’.

So when you read “sectarian drift”, think so-called “misinformation”, or thoughts not allowed by the French government, literally, ‘deviation of freedom of thought’. It was borne out of French persecution of religious groups during the French revolution, which started in 1789.

Variants Are Already In Use

One private detective firm even offers to investigate people who dares think contrary to the French government, it is that normalised in French. Terrifying.

The French government also recently declared war on “sectarian entrepreneurs” (whatever that means).

“Sectarian aberrations” in law are, by the very tyrannical nature, ambiguous and undefined.

It was reported back in December 13th, 2023, that the law being discused would be expanded to attack natural health (read: anyone who dissents against the government narrative on healthcare).

French mainstream media wrote hitpieces declaring people advocating for their well-being during 2020 were ‘cults’. So this new bill expands to cover COVID-19 related methodologies.

Wasn’t It Scrapped?

The French public seem confused and think the amendment to the bill was scrapped.

Despite the fact the so-called “Article 4” was reportedly scrapped, Sacha Houlié (‘Président de la Commission des Lois’ [President of the Law Commission]) called for a “second deliberation”.

This essentially re-appended the rejected ‘Article 4’ via forced passage, bringing it back from the dead (hence the confusion by many French members of the public who thought the motion had failed).

Sacha Houlié, part of the National Assembly, was doing his paymasters’ work forcing an undemocratic bill by abusing an obscure loophole via the fittingly named ‘Rule 101’ (an Orwellian reference if there ever was one), much to the displeasure of other members of the National Assembly.

Quelle surprise that Sacha Houlié is an ardent vaccine promoter who previously promoted vaccine uptake, this is despite the fact most French MPs apparently haven’t taken the shots themselves (according to one French former MP, Jean Lassalle, who did, timestamp 9:44 of this video onwards).

For Americans, Sacha’s handiwork would be like if the Speaker of the House could do a last minute restoration of a voted-down and removed Amendment to a bill that was just about to pass, picking an inopportune time to do it such votes on the bill would be skewered.

The other MPs reportedly complicit with Sacha’s actions were:

Caroline Yadan
Thomas Ménage
Ludovic Mendes
Philippe Gosselin
Blandine Brocard
Didier Lemaire
Marietta Karamanli
Jérémie Iordanoff
Marie-France Lorho
Edwige Diaz
Stéphane Rambaud
Jean-François Coulomme

Not all members sponsored this bill, though.

One such member displeased with Sacha’s undemocratic tactics is N. Dupont-Aignan (Député de l'Essonne et Président de Debout la France [Member of Parliament for Essonne and President of 'Stand up France']), who rightly called Sacha’s move undemocratic. It also infuriated the French public.

So What Are The Implications?

What does this amendment, relating to ‘crime of incitement to forego care’, do?

It tries to “expand” the French Constitution in order to classify those trying to discourage people from receiving so-called ‘care’ (remember: their idea of receiving care is receiving the mRNA poison shot) as causing “sectarian aberrations”, allowing them to be penalised under so-called anti-cult laws run by MIVILUDES.

Whilst some folks have made unsubstantiated claims of penalties of ‘3 years prison’, MIVILUDES appear to have particularly wide discretion on what sort of penalties they can hand out.

For example, in one case involving rape, MIVILUDES gave out a 15 year imprisonment sentence.

In a case involving the “refusal of treatment for a child” (it doesn’t say what the supposed treatment was), it was a one year suspended sentence:

In another case, 3 months prison with a 9000 euro fine.

It is therefore very likely this law, under the threat of jail, prohibits the French public from discouraging members of the public from receiving any of the shots, not just mRNA, given that historically MIVILUDES have jailed people for advising against receipt in general.

So yes, it is very likely criticism of the mRNA shots — along with others — that results in people not receiving the shots is now illegal in France.

The Daily Beagle

Discussion about this post