Posted on 01/13/2022 9:54:51 PM PST by ransomnote
Paypal is trying to choke off donations going to fund the reporting at DailyExpose.uk (over the target). Prayers up that the DailyExpose will continue to survive Paypal's effort at censorship.
ransomnote: Image on Expose website of fencing around quarantine area.
Unelected health officials in the state of Washington have filed a bill that would involve deploying “strike force” teams to round up and “involuntarily detain” unvaccinated families.
The proposed agenda, called WAC 246-100-040, was revealed during a recent Zoom meeting by the Washington State Board of Health. The bill would amend state law to allow residents as young as five to be detained by the state and sent to Covid-19 quarantine camps.
The proposed revision under Washington’s Communicable and Certain Other Disease Act outlines specific “Procedures for isolation or quarantine” that are incredibly tyrannical and discriminate against unvaccinated people.
A local health officer would be granted power to “issue an emergency detention order causing a person or group of persons to be immediately detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine.”
The bill further states that health officers would need to provide documentation proving that unvaccinated citizens of Washington subject to detention have denied “requests for medical examination, testing, treatment, counselling, vaccination, decontamination of persons or animals, isolation, quarantine and inspection and closure of facilities” before they would be given the thumbs up on sending people to the covid camps.
According to reports, the amendment would also allow health officers to deploy law enforcement to assist with the arrest of Washington residents who fail to comply.
The amendment goes on to provision that “a local health officer may invoke the powers of police officers, sheriffs, constables, and all other officers and employees of any political subdivisions within the jurisdiction of the health department to enforce immediately orders given to effectuate the purposes of this section in accordance with the provisions of RCW 43.20.050(4) and 70.05.120.”
In the event of an “emergency detention order,” isolation and detainment of Washington citizens who do not comply would be allowed “for a period not to exceed ten days.”
Those who continue to refuse treatment or vaccination during the seven-day period could be held “for a period not to exceed thirty days.”
ransomnote: Here's the link text of the proposed quarantine policy:
Link: WAC 246-100-040:
Here's a link to a pdf to download the policy:
Quarantine policy text from that webpage posted below:
PDFWAC 246-100-040
Procedures for isolation or quarantine.
(1) At his or her sole discretion, a local health officer may issue an emergency detention order causing a person or group of persons to be immediately detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine in accordance with subsection (3) of this section, or may petition the superior court ex parte for an order to take the person or group of persons into involuntary detention for purposes of isolation or quarantine in accordance with subsection (4) of this section, provided that he or she:(a) Has first made reasonable efforts, which shall be documented, to obtain voluntary compliance with requests for medical examination, testing, treatment, counseling, vaccination, decontamination of persons or animals, isolation, quarantine, and inspection and closure of facilities, or has determined in his or her professional judgment that seeking voluntary compliance would create a risk of serious harm; and(b) Has reason to believe that the person or group of persons is, or is suspected to be, infected with, exposed to, or contaminated with a communicable disease or chemical, biological, or radiological agent that could spread to or contaminate others if remedial action is not taken; and(c) Has reason to believe that the person or group of persons would pose a serious and imminent risk to the health and safety of others if not detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine.(2) A local health officer may invoke the powers of police officers, sheriffs, constables, and all other officers and employees of any political subdivisions within the jurisdiction of the health department to enforce immediately orders given to effectuate the purposes of this section in accordance with the provisions of RCW 43.20.050(4) and 70.05.120.(3) If a local health officer orders the immediate involuntary detention of a person or group of persons for purposes of isolation or quarantine:(a) The emergency detention order shall be for a period not to exceed ten days.(b) The local health officer shall issue a written emergency detention order as soon as reasonably possible and in all cases within twelve hours of detention that shall specify the following:(i) The identity of all persons or groups subject to isolation or quarantine;(ii) The premises subject to isolation or quarantine;(iii) The date and time at which isolation or quarantine commences;(iv) The suspected communicable disease or infectious agent if known;(v) The measures taken by the local health officer to seek voluntary compliance or the basis on which the local health officer determined that seeking voluntary compliance would create a risk of serious harm; and(vi) The medical basis on which isolation or quarantine is justified.(c) The local health officer shall provide copies of the written emergency detention order to the person or group of persons detained or, if the order applies to a group and it is impractical to provide individual copies, post copies in a conspicuous place in the premises where isolation or quarantine has been imposed.(d) Along with the written order, and by the same means of distribution, the local health officer shall provide the person or group of persons detained with the following written notice:NOTICE: You have the right to petition the superior court for release from isolation or quarantine in accordance with WAC 246-100-055. You have a right to legal counsel. If you are unable to afford legal counsel, then counsel will be appointed for you at government expense and you should request the appointment of counsel at this time. If you currently have legal counsel, then you have an opportunity to contact that counsel for assistance.(4) If a local health officer petitions the superior court ex parte for an order authorizing involuntary detention of a person or group of persons for purposes of isolation or quarantine pursuant to this section:(a) The petition shall specify:(i) The identity of all persons or groups to be subject to isolation or quarantine;(ii) The premises where isolation or quarantine will take place;(iii) The date and time at which isolation or quarantine will commence;(iv) The suspected communicable disease or infectious agent if known;(v) The anticipated duration of isolation or quarantine based on the suspected communicable disease or infectious agent if known;(vi) The measures taken by the local health officer to seek voluntary compliance or the basis on which the local health officer determined that seeking voluntary compliance would create a risk of serious harm;(vii) The medical basis on which isolation or quarantine is justified.(b) The petition shall be accompanied by the declaration of the local health officer attesting to the facts asserted in the petition, together with any further information that may be relevant and material to the court's consideration.(c) Notice to the persons or groups identified in the petition shall be accomplished in accordance with the rules of civil procedure.(d) The court shall hold a hearing on a petition filed pursuant to this section within seventy-two hours of filing, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays.(e) The court shall issue the order if there is a reasonable basis to find that isolation or quarantine is necessary to prevent a serious and imminent risk to the health and safety of others.(f) A court order authorizing isolation or quarantine as a result of an ex parte hearing shall:(i) Specify a maximum duration for isolation or quarantine not to exceed ten days;(ii) Identify the isolated or quarantined persons or groups by name or shared or similar characteristics or circumstances;(iii) Specify factual findings warranting isolation or quarantine pursuant to this section;(iv) Include any conditions necessary to ensure that isolation or quarantine is carried out within the stated purposes and restrictions of this section;(v) Specify the premises where isolation or quarantine will take place; and(vi) Be served on all affected persons or groups in accordance with the rules of civil procedure.(5) A local health officer may petition the superior court for an order authorizing the continued isolation or quarantine of a person or group detained under subsections (3) or (4) of this section for a period up to thirty days.(a) The petition shall specify:(i) The identity of all persons or groups subject to isolation or quarantine;(ii) The premises where isolation or quarantine is taking place;(iii) The communicable disease or infectious agent if known;(iv) The anticipated duration of isolation or quarantine based on the suspected communicable disease or infectious agent if known;(v) The medical basis on which continued isolation or quarantine is justified.(b) The petition shall be accompanied by the declaration of the local health officer attesting to the facts asserted in the petition, together with any further information that may be relevant and material to the court's consideration.(c) The petition shall be accompanied by a statement of compliance with the conditions and principles for isolation and quarantine contained in WAC 246-100-045.(d) Notice to the persons or groups identified in the petition shall be accomplished in accordance with the rules of civil procedure.(e) The court shall hold a hearing on a petition filed pursuant to this subsection within seventy-two hours of filing, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. In extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown, the local health officer may apply to continue the hearing date for up to ten days, which continuance the court may grant at its discretion giving due regard to the rights of the affected individuals, the protection of the public's health, the severity of the public health threat, and the availability of necessary witnesses and evidence.(f) The court shall grant the petition if it finds that there is clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that isolation or quarantine is necessary to prevent a serious and imminent risk to the health and safety of others.(g) A court order authorizing continued isolation or quarantine as a result of a hearing shall:(i) Specify a maximum duration for isolation or quarantine not to exceed thirty days;(ii) Identify the isolated or quarantined persons or groups by name or shared or similar characteristics or circumstances;(iii) Specify factual findings warranting isolation or quarantine pursuant to this section;(iv) Include any conditions necessary to ensure that isolation or quarantine is carried out within the stated purposes and restrictions of this section;(v) Specify the premises where isolation or quarantine will take place; and(vi) Be served on all affected persons or groups in accordance with the rules of civil procedure.(6) Prior to the expiration of a court order for continued detention issued pursuant to subsection (5) of this section, the local health officer may petition the superior court to continue isolation or quarantine provided:(a) The court finds there is a reasonable basis to require continued isolation or quarantine to prevent a serious and imminent threat to the health and safety of others.(b) The order shall be for a period not to exceed thirty days.(7) State statutes, rules, and state and federal emergency declarations governing procedures for detention, examination, counseling, testing, treatment, vaccination, isolation, or quarantine for specified health emergencies or specified communicable diseases, including, but not limited to, tuberculosis and HIV, shall supersede this section.
I don’t ask people to support my efforts, I hope people support the cause of freedom and decency that I support.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4029363/posts?page=16#16
Ha ha ha! Health officials filed a bill? This cannot be serious.
| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Washington State to Send Out Strike Teams to “Involuntarily Detain” Unvaccinated Residents and Ship Them to Quarantine Camps [ WAC 246-100-040 ], Steve_Seattle wrote: |
I am unvaccinated and strongly oppose vaccine mandates, and it is discouraging to see that simply raising a question about the accuracy of a post makes me equivalent to a Nazi in some people’s view. |
Those pushing the effort to vax us all to death often say they are against mandates and sometimes say they are not vaccinated and feel that it's a personal choice. That's a token to 'fit in' among those they wish to influence.
But then when I post something that exposes the illicit, devious or unethical efforts to implement the most Orwellian 'protections' come out swinging, vigorously stating, for example, as you have that it's just not true etc.
The content was on a recent Zoom call for a reason, but you continue to shriek there's nothing to see here (you label it false information and distort what's happening.
It seems we’ve developed our fair share of knee-jerks and hair triggers.
I was on the zoom call regarding this issue, I think most of the discussion was a distraction except for item 9 on the agenda. Item 9 was replacing references to HIV aids in the original bill with the wording (blood borne pathogens). This would allow Wac 246-100 which was designed to protect the public from aids to be applied to covid. Covid is a respiratory virus but the virus is also carried in the blood stream making it a “blood borne pathogen “ DISCLOSURE I am not a Dr. Or virologist but this is my uneducated opinion on this issue
Stand Tall
Brad
The Board is not voting to change isolation or quarantine policies at its meeting on Jan. 12. The Board is continuing a November 2021 rules hearing on the proposed rule changes to chapter 246-100 WAC, Communicable and Certain Other Diseases, as published in WSR 21-20-127 at the meeting. The Board is proposing updating its rules to reflect current state law to align with Engrossed Substitute House Bill (ESHB) 1551. Agenda item 9, while related to rulemaking on chapter 246-100 WAC, is scoped only to the implementation of ESHB 1551 (Chapter 76, Laws of 2020) and does not include changes to isolation and quarantine policies nor does it suggest law enforcement be used to enforce any vaccination requirements. More information is available on the Communicable and Certain Other Diseases rule web page.
-PJ
“but you don’t help the cause by posting misleading information”
Does he realize that enforcing that would erase her entire output?
Misinformation means it’s true but the deep state doesn’t want it known. Up till now I thought this wasn’t true.
Somebody ought to have watched it by now, to affirm or refute this story's implications. I just haven't done it.
-PJ
| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Washington State to Send Out Strike Teams to “Involuntarily Detain” Unvaccinated Residents and Ship Them to Quarantine Camps [ WAC 246-100-040 ], standing man wrote: |
I was on the zoom call regarding this issue, I think most of the discussion was a distraction except for item 9 on the agenda. Item 9 was replacing references to HIV aids in the original bill with the wording (blood borne pathogens). This would allow Wac 246-100 which was designed to protect the public from aids to be applied to covid. Covid is a respiratory virus but the virus is also carried in the blood stream making it a “blood borne pathogen “ DISCLOSURE I am not a Dr. Or virologist but this is my uneducated opinion on this issue |
Good post, standing man. I know they are up to something when they deny that such talk means ANYTHING AT ALL.
I think you nailed it - the other similar bill I posted was NYC updating their rules from the same era. I think they were piggy backing on the AIDS agenda intentionally (part of a plan to get people onboard with quarantining).
Then when their efforts are exposed, panic ensues "The Troglodytes think we intended to actually do something with the agenda item/amendment!!!"
-PJ
They were caving to the AIDS Brigade and the Gaystapo:
Other changes proposed included removing repetitive language and creating clearer definitions.
A few HIV Advocates like Mark Garrett shared their thoughts on the changes to the administrative code.
“This legislation and the proposed rule changes have taken over seven years to accomplish and I think we should all be proud of where we’ve come to,” Garrett said. “We are 1000 percent better in language.”
No, the NY bill you kept posting about, the one that never made it out committee (and therefore never enacted), and was withdrawn by its sponsor, had nothing to with AIDS. It was originally proposed during the Ebola outbreak and was all about Ebola.
I think this is a case of smacking down anyone who dares to deviate, even slightly, from the orthodoxy of the cult. Not allowed.
| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Washington State to Send Out Strike Teams to “Involuntarily Detain” Unvaccinated Residents and Ship Them to Quarantine Camps [ WAC 246-100-040 ], CatHerd wrote: |
No, the NY bill you kept posting about, the one that never made it out committee (and therefore never enacted), and was withdrawn by its sponsor, had nothing to with AIDS. It was originally proposed during the Ebola outbreak and was all about Ebola. |
NY used Ebola as cover to get the camp/quarantine/mandatory vaccines started prior to Hillary Clinton taking office wherein she would rollout the Plandemic.
It's just that Washington used AIDS as an excuse. See, they didn't want to look as obviously coordinated as it actually was.
That’s generally the path that happens. Once the focus turns inward the war for correct thought heats up in a hurry. Early cult prophets find themselves in the crosshairs of zealots.
Yes, with you, everything that does not suit your conspiracy theory du jour is a “cover” or a “distraction” or a “false flag” or whatever.
Right now you have yourself convinced this was all planned 17 years in advance, vaccines and all, back in 2003 for Hillary’s future reign.
You are free to believe whatever you wish. Biden’s earlobes included. Enjoy.
No, the NY bill you kept posting about, the one that never made it out committee (and therefore never enacted), and was withdrawn by its sponsor, had nothing to with AIDS. It was originally proposed during the Ebola outbreak and was all about Ebola.
~~~~~~~
Your kind sure is sensitive about these efforts to set up camps in the US. Frantic deflection and accusations from your kind. Good.
Yep, existing health code from 2003, no new “bill”, and the bill (2020) that initiated the recent WA health board meeting that caused all the kerfuffle among the “GP” Internet conspiracy crowd regards HIV and STD’s:
“Item 9 Presentation”:
https://sboh.wa.gov/Portals/7/Doc/Meetings/2022/Jan%2012/Tab9b-CommunicableDisease-PPT.pdf?ver=2022-01-07-180849-073
“Item 9” supporting materials:
https://sboh.wa.gov/Meetings/MeetingInformation/2022/January12Online
The 2020 WA bill that initiated the need for “Item 9” of the WA health board January 12th meeting:
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2019-20/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/House/1551-S.E%20HBR%20APH%2020.pdf?q=20200214132900
3 other FR threads on this subject (equally incorrect):
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4027942/posts
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4028073/posts
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4028170/posts
They released inmates from their jails and prisons because of Covid, and now are rounding up law abiding citizens, and locking them up because of Covid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
