https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/

‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
Charles Hymas,
HOME AFFAIRS EDITOR
and
Ben Butcher,
DATA EDITOR
18 June 2024 • 8:02pm

Sir Robert Buckland
Sir Robert Buckland said those fined by the courts should have their
'slates wiped clean' CREDIT: Eddie Mulholland For The Telegraph
The justice secretary who oversaw the courts during the pandemic has
called for an amnesty for the more than 29,000 people given criminal
convictions for breaking Covid rules.
Sir Robert Buckland said the 29,383 people fined by the courts should
have their “slates wiped clean” rather than risk their career prospects
being hampered by convictions handed out at an “exceptional time”.
Sir Robert’s call has been backed by two former Cabinet ministers and
charities while a source close to Alex Chalk, the current Justice
Secretary, said he was also sympathetic to the idea of wiping the slate
clean.
Magistrates fined people for breaking Covid restrictions, resulting in
criminal convictions that could bar them from working as teachers,
social workers or police officers.
Police can pass on these details to potential employers if they are
deemed “relevant” for criminal background checks for sensitive jobs
where applicants deal with vulnerable people or children.
People are also required to declare any criminal convictions when
applying for visas to visit countries like the US and Canada, both of
which reserve the right to permanently ban anyone who fails to reveal one.
Offences including attending gatherings, leaving home during lockdowns
and failing to wear face coverings resulted in fines, with three
quarters of those handed out between 2020 and 2023 going to people under
the age of 40.
Should Covid rule-breaking convictions stay on people's records?

Yes, records should be 'wiped clean'

No, convictions should stay
Total votes: 64
Sir Robert, who was justice secretary from July 2019 to September 2021,
said any background criminal checks should focus on those who might be a
threat to public safety, rather than people fined in the “exceptional
circumstances” of a pandemic.
He said: “It is not proportionate or necessary at a time when we want to
encourage and support as many people back to work as possible. If it is
not being recorded in the usual way as a previous conviction, I would
wipe the slate clean.”
Sir Robert is among three former Cabinet ministers and charities
demanding an amnesty following the Government’s previous assurances that
Covid fines were not intended to criminalise large numbers of people.
‘A shameful disgrace’
Sir David Davis, a former cabinet minister, said all but the most
egregious breaches should be “obliterated” from the record. He said:
“Much of the Covid regulation was heavy handed, unnecessary and
penalised people wrongly. For this to turn into a lifetime penalty is a
shameful disgrace and we should correct it as soon as possible.”
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, said: “It is time
for an amnesty on Covid fines which were an unnecessarily draconian
measure at the time but with hindsight look entirely disproportionate.”
Penelope Gibbs, director of charity Transform Justice, said: “The Covid
laws were enacted too hastily, poorly drafted and badly explained. So
people often broke the law unwittingly and had no right to free legal
advice if they were prosecuted.
“Many of those fined now have criminal convictions which could harm
their job chances for years to come. We should have an amnesty that
wipes the slate clean of all these Covid offences.”
Among those landed with convictions were an 18-year-old student who
attended a party during a lockdown, a 35-year-old man who hosted family
members on New Year’s Eve and a 72-year-old woman who travelled back
from Kenya without evidence of a negative Covid test.
Fines issued worth £26m
Ministry of Justice data shows the 29,000 fines of up to £10,000 issued
by magistrates totalled £26 million, which was higher than for any other
type of crime since the start of the pandemic apart from motoring
offences and TV licence evasion.
People in their 30s accounted for the largest amount of fines at £6.9
million, although those aged 20 or below paid out £3.3 million. Almost
half of the fines, £12.4 million, were raised by just five forces: the
Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Lancashire and
South Wales.
The court-issued sanctions come on top of at least £8.2 million that
people paid after being handed fixed penalty notices (FPNs) by police,
an alternative to prosecution.
Those issued by magistrates are deemed criminal convictions and comprise
people prosecuted after failing to pay or contesting their initial FPNs.
The MoJ says they should not be recorded on the Police National Computer
(PNC) and do not result in a criminal record.
Despite this, at least 3,000 Covid convictions have been logged on the
PNC, meaning the offender has a criminal record. Police can also hold
records of the convictions locally and on the Police National Database
(PND), a separate system.
While they are not automatically included in vetting procedures by the
Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), police can include any Covid
convictions in “enhanced” DBS checks on applicants for sensitive jobs if
they deem them “relevant to the job for which the person is applying”.
The Home Office believes it is unlikely Covid fines would be included on
enhanced DBS checks, while an individual could appeal their inclusion to
an independent monitor.
It said that if a Covid conviction was included on a check, it would not
automatically bar an individual from a specific job and would be
considered by the prospective employer.
Sir Charles Walker, chair of the Commons Administration Committee until
Parliament’s dissolution, said it was “incumbent” on the next parliament
to come up with a remedy to the potential criminalisation of people who
breached the Covid rules. “The idea that anybody with a Covid fine is a
serial lawbreaker is utter nonsense,” he said.
“The law was changing almost hourly and it was very difficult for people
to keep up with those complex changes. While ignorance is no defence, it
was always possible to fall foul of them. It would be ridiculous if it
prevented people from travelling overseas on business or on holiday.”
Jo Easton, chief executive of Unlock, a charity that campaigns against
the stigma of criminal records, said there was a lack of transparency
about police forces’ DBS checks. “It’s a complete black hole. We would
like a lot more transparency about what different police forces include
and what they don’t,” she said.
Were you or someone you know given a fine that was unfair? Join the
debate in the comments below.

Michael Ejercito wrote:

>https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/
>
>
>‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
>Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
>during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
>Charles Hymas,
>HOME AFFAIRS EDITOR
>and
>Ben Butcher,
>DATA EDITOR
>18 June 2024 • 8:02pm
>
>Sir Robert Buckland
>Sir Robert Buckland said those fined by the courts should have their
>'slates wiped clean' CREDIT: Eddie Mulholland For The Telegraph
>The justice secretary who oversaw the courts during the pandemic has
>called for an amnesty for the more than 29,000 people given criminal
>convictions for breaking Covid rules.
>Sir Robert Buckland said the 29,383 people fined by the courts should
>have their “slates wiped clean” rather than risk their career prospects
>being hampered by convictions handed out at an “exceptional time”.
>Sir Robert’s call has been backed by two former Cabinet ministers and
>charities while a source close to Alex Chalk, the current Justice
>Secretary, said he was also sympathetic to the idea of wiping the slate
>clean.
>Magistrates fined people for breaking Covid restrictions, resulting in
>criminal convictions that could bar them from working as teachers,
>social workers or police officers.
>Police can pass on these details to potential employers if they are
>deemed “relevant” for criminal background checks for sensitive jobs
>where applicants deal with vulnerable people or children.
>People are also required to declare any criminal convictions when
>applying for visas to visit countries like the US and Canada, both of
>which reserve the right to permanently ban anyone who fails to reveal one.
>Offences including attending gatherings, leaving home during lockdowns
>and failing to wear face coverings resulted in fines, with three
>quarters of those handed out between 2020 and 2023 going to people under
>the age of 40.
>Should Covid rule-breaking convictions stay on people's records?
>
>
>Yes, records should be 'wiped clean'
>
>
>No, convictions should stay
>Total votes: 64
>Sir Robert, who was justice secretary from July 2019 to September 2021,
>said any background criminal checks should focus on those who might be a
>threat to public safety, rather than people fined in the “exceptional
>circumstances” of a pandemic.
>He said: “It is not proportionate or necessary at a time when we want to
>encourage and support as many people back to work as possible. If it is
>not being recorded in the usual way as a previous conviction, I would
>wipe the slate clean.”
>Sir Robert is among three former Cabinet ministers and charities
>demanding an amnesty following the Government’s previous assurances that
>Covid fines were not intended to criminalise large numbers of people.
>‘A shameful disgrace’
>Sir David Davis, a former cabinet minister, said all but the most
>egregious breaches should be “obliterated” from the record. He said:
>“Much of the Covid regulation was heavy handed, unnecessary and
>penalised people wrongly. For this to turn into a lifetime penalty is a
>shameful disgrace and we should correct it as soon as possible.”
>Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, said: “It is time
>for an amnesty on Covid fines which were an unnecessarily draconian
>measure at the time but with hindsight look entirely disproportionate.”
>Penelope Gibbs, director of charity Transform Justice, said: “The Covid
>laws were enacted too hastily, poorly drafted and badly explained. So
>people often broke the law unwittingly and had no right to free legal
>advice if they were prosecuted.
>“Many of those fined now have criminal convictions which could harm
>their job chances for years to come. We should have an amnesty that
>wipes the slate clean of all these Covid offences.”
>Among those landed with convictions were an 18-year-old student who
>attended a party during a lockdown, a 35-year-old man who hosted family
>members on New Year’s Eve and a 72-year-old woman who travelled back
>from Kenya without evidence of a negative Covid test.
>Fines issued worth £26m
>Ministry of Justice data shows the 29,000 fines of up to £10,000 issued
>by magistrates totalled £26 million, which was higher than for any other
>type of crime since the start of the pandemic apart from motoring
>offences and TV licence evasion.
>People in their 30s accounted for the largest amount of fines at £6.9
>million, although those aged 20 or below paid out £3.3 million. Almost
>half of the fines, £12.4 million, were raised by just five forces: the
>Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Lancashire and
>South Wales.
>The court-issued sanctions come on top of at least £8.2 million that
>people paid after being handed fixed penalty notices (FPNs) by police,
>an alternative to prosecution.
>Those issued by magistrates are deemed criminal convictions and comprise
>people prosecuted after failing to pay or contesting their initial FPNs.
>The MoJ says they should not be recorded on the Police National Computer
>(PNC) and do not result in a criminal record.
>Despite this, at least 3,000 Covid convictions have been logged on the
>PNC, meaning the offender has a criminal record. Police can also hold
>records of the convictions locally and on the Police National Database
>(PND), a separate system.
>While they are not automatically included in vetting procedures by the
>Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), police can include any Covid
>convictions in “enhanced” DBS checks on applicants for sensitive jobs if
>they deem them “relevant to the job for which the person is applying”.
>The Home Office believes it is unlikely Covid fines would be included on
>enhanced DBS checks, while an individual could appeal their inclusion to
>an independent monitor.
>It said that if a Covid conviction was included on a check, it would not
>automatically bar an individual from a specific job and would be
>considered by the prospective employer.
>Sir Charles Walker, chair of the Commons Administration Committee until
>Parliament’s dissolution, said it was “incumbent” on the next parliament
>to come up with a remedy to the potential criminalisation of people who
>breached the Covid rules. “The idea that anybody with a Covid fine is a
>serial lawbreaker is utter nonsense,” he said.
>“The law was changing almost hourly and it was very difficult for people
>to keep up with those complex changes. While ignorance is no defence, it
>was always possible to fall foul of them. It would be ridiculous if it
>prevented people from travelling overseas on business or on holiday.”
>Jo Easton, chief executive of Unlock, a charity that campaigns against
>the stigma of criminal records, said there was a lack of transparency
>about police forces’ DBS checks. “It’s a complete black hole. We would
>like a lot more transparency about what different police forces include
>and what they don’t,” she said.

In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).

Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given
moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
"convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and
self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
longer effective.

Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry (
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ
) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.

So how are you ?

(Jo) 06/20/24 Again not a LoosePeeledQuackIdiot bigot ...

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/Ai33hw5PINI/m/wytVpY68MwAJ

Instead be "woke" to the sin of racial prejudice:

https://tinyurl.com/JesusIsWoke (i.e. not a Nazi bigot) *and* risen!!!

Disgusted of Tunbridge Wellsabout 14 hours ago
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 07:17:27 -0700, NOT Michael Ejercito
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us

>>/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/
>> ‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
>> Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
>> during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
>> Charles Hymas,
> This has no relevance to you, gook. You're not even ELIGIBLE to
> ENTER the UK!
Mangina, I shared an article iof interest but instead of addressing
the merits, you call me a gook.

That is immoral.

You are a Nazi.

As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.

You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know you
can not measure up.

You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.

You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.

You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of National
Socialism.

Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you… which is why you choose minor children
as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent adults in a
consensually sexual way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a
helpless victim, be it a prepubescent boy, or a patient in a mental
hospital.

That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or honest
about it.

Michael

> HeartDoc Andrewabout 20 hours ago
> In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
> GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
> secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
> us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
> pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
> 100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
> appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).
>
> Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
> COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
> rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given
> moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
> contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
> "convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and
> self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
> Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
> scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
> Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
> combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
> that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
> longer effective.
>
> Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry (
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ
> ) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
>
> So how are you ?
I am wonderfully hungry!

Michael

Michael Ejercito wrote:
> HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Michael Ejercito wrote:
>>
>>>https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/
>>>
>>>
>>>‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
>>>Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
>>>during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
>>>Charles Hymas,
>>>HOME AFFAIRS EDITOR
>>>and
>>>Ben Butcher,
>>>DATA EDITOR
>>>18 June 2024 • 8:02pm
>>>
>>>Sir Robert Buckland
>>>Sir Robert Buckland said those fined by the courts should have their
>>>'slates wiped clean' CREDIT: Eddie Mulholland For The Telegraph
>>>The justice secretary who oversaw the courts during the pandemic has
>>>called for an amnesty for the more than 29,000 people given criminal
>>>convictions for breaking Covid rules.
>>>Sir Robert Buckland said the 29,383 people fined by the courts should
>>>have their “slates wiped clean” rather than risk their career prospects
>>>being hampered by convictions handed out at an “exceptional time”.
>>>Sir Robert’s call has been backed by two former Cabinet ministers and
>>>charities while a source close to Alex Chalk, the current Justice
>>>Secretary, said he was also sympathetic to the idea of wiping the slate
>>>clean.
>>>Magistrates fined people for breaking Covid restrictions, resulting in
>>>criminal convictions that could bar them from working as teachers,
>>>social workers or police officers.
>>>Police can pass on these details to potential employers if they are
>>>deemed “relevant” for criminal background checks for sensitive jobs
>>>where applicants deal with vulnerable people or children.
>>>People are also required to declare any criminal convictions when
>>>applying for visas to visit countries like the US and Canada, both of
>>>which reserve the right to permanently ban anyone who fails to reveal one.
>>>Offences including attending gatherings, leaving home during lockdowns
>>>and failing to wear face coverings resulted in fines, with three
>>>quarters of those handed out between 2020 and 2023 going to people under
>>>the age of 40.
>>>Should Covid rule-breaking convictions stay on people's records?
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, records should be 'wiped clean'
>>>
>>>
>>>No, convictions should stay
>>>Total votes: 64
>>>Sir Robert, who was justice secretary from July 2019 to September 2021,
>>>said any background criminal checks should focus on those who might be a
>>>threat to public safety, rather than people fined in the “exceptional
>>>circumstances” of a pandemic.
>>>He said: “It is not proportionate or necessary at a time when we want to
>>>encourage and support as many people back to work as possible. If it is
>>>not being recorded in the usual way as a previous conviction, I would
>>>wipe the slate clean.”
>>>Sir Robert is among three former Cabinet ministers and charities
>>>demanding an amnesty following the Government’s previous assurances that
>>>Covid fines were not intended to criminalise large numbers of people.
>>>‘A shameful disgrace’
>>>Sir David Davis, a former cabinet minister, said all but the most
>>>egregious breaches should be “obliterated” from the record. He said:
>>>“Much of the Covid regulation was heavy handed, unnecessary and
>>>penalised people wrongly. For this to turn into a lifetime penalty is a
>>>shameful disgrace and we should correct it as soon as possible.”
>>>Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, said: “It is time
>>>for an amnesty on Covid fines which were an unnecessarily draconian
>>>measure at the time but with hindsight look entirely disproportionate.”
>>>Penelope Gibbs, director of charity Transform Justice, said: “The Covid
>>>laws were enacted too hastily, poorly drafted and badly explained. So
>>>people often broke the law unwittingly and had no right to free legal
>>>advice if they were prosecuted.
>>>“Many of those fined now have criminal convictions which could harm
>>>their job chances for years to come. We should have an amnesty that
>>>wipes the slate clean of all these Covid offences.”
>>>Among those landed with convictions were an 18-year-old student who
>>>attended a party during a lockdown, a 35-year-old man who hosted family
>>>members on New Year’s Eve and a 72-year-old woman who travelled back
>>>from Kenya without evidence of a negative Covid test.
>>>Fines issued worth £26m
>>>Ministry of Justice data shows the 29,000 fines of up to £10,000 issued
>>>by magistrates totalled £26 million, which was higher than for any other
>>>type of crime since the start of the pandemic apart from motoring
>>>offences and TV licence evasion.
>>>People in their 30s accounted for the largest amount of fines at £6.9
>>>million, although those aged 20 or below paid out £3.3 million. Almost
>>>half of the fines, £12.4 million, were raised by just five forces: the
>>>Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Lancashire and
>>>South Wales.
>>>The court-issued sanctions come on top of at least £8.2 million that
>>>people paid after being handed fixed penalty notices (FPNs) by police,
>>>an alternative to prosecution.
>>>Those issued by magistrates are deemed criminal convictions and comprise
>>>people prosecuted after failing to pay or contesting their initial FPNs.
>>>The MoJ says they should not be recorded on the Police National Computer
>>>(PNC) and do not result in a criminal record.
>>>Despite this, at least 3,000 Covid convictions have been logged on the
>>>PNC, meaning the offender has a criminal record. Police can also hold
>>>records of the convictions locally and on the Police National Database
>>>(PND), a separate system.
>>>While they are not automatically included in vetting procedures by the
>>>Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), police can include any Covid
>>>convictions in “enhanced” DBS checks on applicants for sensitive jobs if
>>>they deem them “relevant to the job for which the person is applying”.
>>>The Home Office believes it is unlikely Covid fines would be included on
>>>enhanced DBS checks, while an individual could appeal their inclusion to
>>>an independent monitor.
>>>It said that if a Covid conviction was included on a check, it would not
>>>automatically bar an individual from a specific job and would be
>>>considered by the prospective employer.
>>>Sir Charles Walker, chair of the Commons Administration Committee until
>>>Parliament’s dissolution, said it was “incumbent” on the next parliament
>>>to come up with a remedy to the potential criminalisation of people who
>>>breached the Covid rules. “The idea that anybody with a Covid fine is a
>>>serial lawbreaker is utter nonsense,” he said.
>>>“The law was changing almost hourly and it was very difficult for people
>>>to keep up with those complex changes. While ignorance is no defence, it
>>>was always possible to fall foul of them. It would be ridiculous if it
>>>prevented people from travelling overseas on business or on holiday.”
>>>Jo Easton, chief executive of Unlock, a charity that campaigns against
>>>the stigma of criminal records, said there was a lack of transparency
>>>about police forces’ DBS checks. “It’s a complete black hole. We would
>>>like a lot more transparency about what different police forces include
>>>and what they don’t,” she said.
>>
>>In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
>>GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
>>secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
>>us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
>>pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
>>100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
>>appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).
>>
>>Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
>>COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
>>rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given
>>moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
>>contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
>>"convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and
>>self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
>>Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
>>scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
>>Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
>>combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
>>that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
>>longer effective.
>>
>>Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry (
>>https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ
>>) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
>>
>>So how are you ?
>
> I am wonderfully hungry!

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 07:17:27 -0700, Michael Ejercito
<MEjercit@HotMail.com> wrote:

>https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/
>
>
>‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
>Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
>during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
>
>

Do you think Britain granting amnesty to their criminals will
influence Americans to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants like you?
Keep dreaming.

Disgusted of Tunbridge Wellsabout 22 hours ago
> ReplyPermalinkOn Thu, 20 Jun 2024 23:21:46 -0700, NOT Michael Ejercito
>> Mangina, I shared an article iof interest but instead of addressing
>> the merits, you call me a gook.
> Gook, I dismissed the relevance of the article to someone like you but
> instead of addressing the merits of my dismissal, you
> screech/wail/howl about being called a gook.
Nithing, you could not deal with the merits of the article!

>> That is immoral.
> You are EXEMPT from morals.
Wrong, for I am Human.

>> You are a Nazi.
> You are a gook.
That would be better than being a Nazi nithing.

>> As a Nazi, you are, above all else
> As a craven gook who zsuckles jew ani, you are, below all else
I suck no ani.

I doubt that you fuck Judenfraulein (or any) vulvae!

You are a nithing- homo sapiens by birth, subhuman BY CHOICE. The
key word is CHOICE. You were born with the same human nature as the
rest of us. Your CHOICES made you a nithing.

Bill explains what nithings are.

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=9446

Define and Dehumanize the Enemy: Jihadists as Nithings or Nidings

by Bill Levinson
It is an ancient principle of magic (which modern people recognize as
stories that reflect a society’s culture and psychology) that
knowledge of a person’s real or True Name delivers power over that
person. What it really means is that, if you know the person’s
psychology, you can gain an advantage over him. It is also well known
that the side that controls the language of an argument controls the
argument. As an example, Hamas terrorists and their enablers refer to
Israel’s military as an “occupation force” and terrorisitic violence
against civilians as “resistance.”

We have long sought a single word that strips the enemy of all
humanity, and reduces him to something less than an animal that is
worthy of nothing less than extermination. As far as we know, the
English language contains no such word, although “dreck” (garbage or
refuse) comes close. “Homo sapiens by BIRTH, subhuman by CHOICE”
describes Islamic supremacists perfectly, but it is a phrase and not a
word. We now propose to refer to Islamic supremacists as nithings or
nidings: a Scandinavian word that strips its object of all humanity.
Webster’s dictionary (1913) defines it as “A coward; a dastard; — a
term of utmost opprobrium.”

We remind readers who object to the dehumanization of Islamic
supremacists that those enemies are already attempting to dehumanize
Jews, and to a lesser degree Christians, with images that could have
come directly from Adolf Hitler. As they have chosen to sow the
dragon’s teeth, our position is that they must now reap their rightful
harvest: the complete hatred and loathing of all civilized human
beings.
nithings

Nithing or niding was more than a common insult, because Scandinavian
culture required its subject to fight a duel with the accuser or
become an outlaw: totally devoid of rights, honor, and even
recognition as a human being. Per the Wikipedia entry,

The actual meaning of the adjective argr or ragr [= Anglo-Saxon
earg] was the nature or appearance of effeminacy, especially by
obscene acts. Argr was the worst, most derogatory swearword of all
known to the Norse language. According to Icelandic law, the accused
was expected to kill the accuser at once. …If the accused did not
retort by violent attack yielding either the accuser to take his words
back or the accuser’s death, he was hence proven to be a weak and
cowardly nithing by not retorting accordingly.

A nithing was devoid of all human rights, and he was considered the
enemy of civilized humanity: a perfect depiction of Islamic
supremacists. The word therefore strips the enemy of all humanity, and
degrades him to the status of a wolf or strangler (per Scandinavian
tradition) or a virulent disease like the Black Plague. Black Plague
is a deadly and contagious disease whose vector consists of plague-
carrying rats, while the Green Plague of militant “Islam” is a deadly
and contagious ideology that is spread by bipedal rats: nidings or
nithings, non-humans that raise violent hands to all of civilized
Humanity.

The immediate consequence of being proven a nithing was
outlawing. The outlawed did not have any rights, he was exlex (Latin
for “outside of the legal system”), in Anglo-Saxon utlah, Middle Low
German uutlagh, Old Norse utlagr. Just as feud yielded enmity among
kinships, outlawry yielded enmity of all humanity.[63] …”Yet that is
but one aspect of outlawry. The outlaw is not only expelled from the
kinship, he is also regarded henceforth as an enemy to mankind.”

The actual definition of a nithing is somewhat more involved and
complex, and it gets into sexual perversions and zoomorphical
transformations (Loki’s transformation of himself into a mare to have
sexual intercourse with a stallion, and thus beget Odin’s horse
Sleipner is probably an example), but the following line is pertinent:
“The nithing used its malicious seid magic to destroy anything owned
and made by man, ultimately the human race and Midgard itself[6], due
to its basically unlimited envy, hate, and malice that were nith.”

"Destruction of everything owned and made by Man” (the Palestinians’
destruction of the greenhouses in Gaza comes to mind immediately) and
“unlimited envy, hate, and malice” describe militant “Islam”
perfectly, and further underscore the application of nithing or niding
to describe it. The propensity for mindless destruction also appears
in Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series, in which a supernatural
enemy is known as the Unmaker: a personification of evil that is the
total antithesis of God the Creator.

The Unmaker is the main antagonist in Orson Scott Card’s
alternate history/fantasy series The Tales of Alvin Maker. Never
directly confronted, it is a supernatural force that breaks apart
matter and aims to destroy and consume everything and everyone. …To
make something is to oppose the Unmaker, but a point often made is
that this is futile. By natural law the Unmaker can tear down faster
than any man can build.

This also is an outstanding definition of militant “Islam” or Islamic
supremacy: an ideology that seeks to destroy everything into which it
comes in contact, and with which no reason, negotiation, or compromise
is possible.

In summary, a nithing or niding is the enemy of Civilization, a
subhuman (through its behavioral choices, and emphatically NOT due to
its racial or ethnic origin) monster with total hatred and malice
toward all human industry and arts, and worthy of nothing but
extermination like any virulent disease. This is the word we will now
apply to Islamic supremacists and their enablers, and we encourage
others to do likewise.

Disgusted of Tunbridge Wellsabout 21 hours ago
> ReplyPermalinkOn Sat, 22 Jun 2024 07:11:48 -0700, NOT Michael Ejercito
>> That would be better than being a Nazi nithing.
> How the fuck CAN it be, gook? I'm WHITE and you;'re just an Oriental
> shitskin!
Skin color may be relevant to sex appeal; it has no relevance to
honor, decency, and integrity.

The following article explains your pathology.

http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/11/historys_oldest_hatred/

History's oldest hatred
By Jeff Jacoby
Globe Columnist / March 11, 2009
Email|Print|Single Page||Text size – +

ANTI-SEMITISM is an ancient derangement, the oldest of hatreds, so
it is strange that it lacks a more meaningful name. The misnomer
"anti-Semitism" - a term coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm
Marr, who wanted a scientific-sounding euphemism for Judenhass, or
Jew-hatred - is particularly inane, since hostility to Jews has never
had anything to do with Semites or being Semitic.

Perhaps there is no good name for a virus as mutable as anti-Semitism.
"The Jews have been objects of hatred in pagan, religious, and secular
societies," write Joseph Telushkin and Dennis Prager in "Why the Jews?,"
their classic study of anti-Semitism. "Fascists have accused them of
being Communists, and Communists have branded them capitalists. Jews who
live in non-Jewish societies have been accused of having dual loyalties,
while Jews who live in the Jewish state have been condemned as
'racists.' Poor Jews are bullied, and rich Jews are resented. Jews have
been branded as both rootless cosmopolitans and ethnic chauvinists. Jews
who assimilate have been called a 'fifth column,' while those who stay
together spark hatred for remaining separate."

There was Jew-hatred before there was Christianity or Islam, before
Nazism or Communism, before Zionism or the Middle East conflict. This
week Jews celebrate the festival of Purim, gathering in synagogues to
read the biblical book of Esther. Set in ancient Persia, it tells of
Haman, a powerful royal adviser who is insulted when the Jewish sage
Mordechai refuses to bow down to him. Haman resolves to wipe out the
empire's Jews and makes the case for genocide in an appeal to the king:

"There is a certain people scattered and dispersed among . . . all the
provinces of your kingdom, and their laws are different from those of
other peoples, and the king's laws they do not keep, so it is of no
benefit for the king to tolerate them. If it please the king, let it be
written that they be destroyed."

When the king agrees, Haman makes plans "to annihilate, to kill and
destroy all the Jews, the young and the elderly, children and women, in
one day . . . and to take their property for plunder."

What drives such bloodlust? Haman's indictment accuses the Jews of
lacking national loyalty, of insinuating themselves throughout the
empire, of flouting the king's law. But the Jews of Persia had done
nothing to justify Haman's murderous anti-Semitism - just as Jews in
later ages did nothing that justified their persecution under the Church
or Islam, or their repression at the hands of Russian czars and Soviet
commissars, or their slaughter by Nazi Germany. When the president of
Iran today calls for the extirpation of the Jewish state, when firebombs
are hurled at synagogues in London and Paris and Chicago, it is not
because Jews deserve to be victimized.

Many Jews are no saints, but the paranoid frenzy that is anti-Semitism
is not explained by what Jews do, but by what they are. They are the
object of anti-Semitism, not its cause. That is why the haters'
rationales can be so wildly inconsistent and their agendas so
contradictory. What do those who vilify Jews as greedy bankers have in
common with those who revile them as fiendish Bolsheviks? Nothing, save
an irrational obsession with Jews.

At one point, Haman lets the mask slip. He boasts to his friends and
family of "the glory of his riches, and the great number of his sons,
and everything in which the king had promoted him and elevated him."
Still, he seethes with rage and frustration: "Yet all this is worthless
to me so long as I see Mordechai the Jew sitting at the king's gate."
That is the unforgivable offense: "Mordechai the Jew" refuses to blend
in, to be just like everyone else. He goes on sitting there -
undigested, unassimilated, and therefore unbearable.

Of course Haman had his ostensible reasons for targeting Jews. So did
Hitler and Arafat, so does Ahmadinejad. Sometimes the anti-Semite
focuses on the Jew's religion, sometimes on his laws and lifestyle,
sometimes on his professional achievements. Under it all, however, it is
the Jew's Jewishness that the anti-Semite cannot abide.

With all their flaws and failings, the Jewish people endure, their role
in history not yet finished. So the world's oldest hatred endures too,
as obsessive and indestructible - and deadly - as ever.

Loose Cannon wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 07:17:27 -0700, Michael Ejercito
> <MEjercit@HotMail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1djd0us/we_need_covid_fine_amnesty_says_exjustice/
>>
>>
>> ‘Convictions for breaking Covid rules should be overturned’
>> Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary who oversaw courts
>> during pandemic, calls for amnesty for more than 29,000 people fined
>>
>>
>
> Do you think Britain granting amnesty to their criminals will
> influence Americans to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants like you?
> Keep dreaming.
>
>
>
>
>
>
There is nothing illegal immigrant about me!

Michael