IS Washington State Poised To Put Un-Vaxxed In Detention Camps?

2.4k views

Many Americans are claiming that the Washington state government is ready to indefinitely incarcerate the “un-jabbed” in detention camps as part of a vast proclamation of “emergency health powers.” But is that REALLY the case?

Washington pop media and Washington bureaucrats imply that the answer is “no.”

But if one looks more deeply, these folks appear to be mimicking the sentiment Bill Clinton once infamously offered:

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

The alarms sounded when people discovered that the state was about to hold meetings on WAC 246-100-040, a revision to the Washington state government’s so-called, “Communicable and Certain Other Diseases Act.”

Word quickly flew around the US that this meeting would grant agents of the government permission to apprehend and indefinitely detain anyone whom a government thug deems a “danger” to spread what the state claims is a “communicable disease.” In other words, if you're not jabbed for whatever they say is dangerous, any government employee might have the power to lock you in a beautiful new place to "stay."

But certain members of the media, and state “authorities,” poopoo these worries, and imply that, as Ian Smay says, for Washington CBS affiliate KREM2:

No, the state isn't trying to forcibly quarantine those who have COVID or are unvaccinated.

But that does not answer the pertinent question. Like the statements of Washington State Board of Health Chair Keith Grellner that Smay soon quotes, in Clintonesque fashion, it deflects from the actual status of people’s rights in Washington State.

Smay offers this from Grellner:

’Just to be really clear, our board meeting on Wednesday is is (sic) there are no conversations about isolation and quarantine camps,’ Grellner said. ‘There are no rules existing or in the making to create isolation and quarantine camps.’

Hello, President Clinton.

Smay correctly points out that the proposed operational changes pertain to portions of the Board of Health Administrative Code – portions that were adopted in the 1980s, that originally pertained to HIV-positive residents, and which were statutorily revised in 2020:

The Board of Health is looking at making changes to a current part of the Washington Administrative Code to make it more in line with changes brought forth by House Bill 1551 in 2020. That bill removed outdated language from the 1980's that targeted people with HIV Aids. 

And if one looks at HB 1551, one can see the HIV-focused language that the revisions eliminated – said linguistic changes actually broadening, beyond AIDS, the scope of communicable diseases covered in the 1980s codes.

But it doesn’t stop there, and KREM’s Smay and Board of Health Chair Grellner either are intentionally distracting and deceiving people, or they are unaware of the deeper foundations that actually ALLOW the WA government to do all of this.

In fact, an investigation into this may tell us that the so-called “conspiracy theorists” are on the right track.

Importantly, HB 1551 is not the only pertinent point of reference. In order to see the larger story, one needs to read the Revised Codes of Washington (RCW), Title 43, Chapter 43.06, Section 43.05.220, which go back to 1969, but saw their revisions pertaining to “emergency powers” slid in circa 2003. So, since Mr. Smay and Mr. Grellner don’t want to bother people with those facts, lets help them out by doing their jobs for them.

On page 176 of the 308 statutory pages revised in 2003, one finds this:

Sec. 222. RCW 43.06.220 and 1969 ex.s. c 186 s 3 are each amended to read as follows: (1) The governor after proclaiming a state of emergency and prior to terminating such, may, in the area described by the proclamation issue an order prohibiting: (((1))) (a) Any person being on the public streets, or in the public parks, or at any other public place during the hours declared by the governor to be a period of curfew; (((2))) (b) Any number of persons, as designated by the governor, from assembling or gathering on the public streets, parks, or other open areas of this state, either public or private…

And the revisions in 2003 also added these magic powers to the WA government’s thuggish arsenal:

...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.’

Anyone with decent vision can read it for himself or herself.

Mr. Smay seems to have decent enough eyesight, so one wonders why he didn’t look at these and report the info.

Likewise for tax-funded bureaucrat Grellner, who either doesn’t know the powers the state already has claimed, or is using verb tenses to distract people from the fact that, in line with the mid-2000s mania seeing 30 state legislatures adopt the toweringly authoritarian and anti-constitutional “Model State Health Emergency Powers Act,” Washington State already has claimed the power to do these things.

To close, let's run through the key points of the EXISTING code, and remember what Smay and Grellner have overlooked.

Right off the bat, there’s:

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…

Goodbye, Fourth Amendment, which, we can remind Smay and Grellner, reads:

Amendment IV - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Goodbye, Fifth Amendment, which reads, in part, that no person shall be:

…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

And since the incarceration comes without trial, or even an accusation that one has harmed the life or property of another, this bill says farewell to the Sixth Amendment, which reads:

Amendment VI - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Oh, and sayonara to the Eighth Amendment, which says:

Amendment VIII - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

As I noted in 2020 when looking at lockdowns and the fines associated with them, it runs counter to all criminal Common Law tradition and the core tenets of tort law for the state to punish someone for a crime which has no claimant victim. The state itself is not a person, and cannot claim victim status. And it’s rather impossible to be punished for a misdeed that not only has no victim, but for which one has not had a trial, or even any accusation of a crime against another person.

This is cynical lawlessness under the guise of statute. It is legal legerdemain.

If you fail to comply with the government's orders -- including potential orders to get jabbed -- you can be put in a detention camp for "a period not to exceed ten days," but a judge can extend that to 30 if the "Unmutual" civilian continues to resist getting jabbed or following other edicts.

 

And the state government claims the 'power' to restart the process, ad infinitum, as long as the Governor (or a President) has declared a “health emergency."

Enjoy looking for that "power," or any allowance of it, in the US Constitution. If you get sucked into their detention camp merry-go-round, you’ll have plenty of time to search in vain for that - and for your lost rights.

And for those who, still, say that the state has not claimed it has such power, consider this:

Why, last year, did Washington State post the hiring announcement for “Isolation & Quarantine Team Consultants,” paying between $3,294.00 - $4,286.00 per month, and offering this, in part...?

The Isolation and Quarantine (I&Q) Section works to decompress hospitals by supporting local and state isolation and quarantine, Alternate Care Facility (ACF), and patient transport (EMS) by partnering with local governments (Tribes, Counties, Cities) and communities, state agencies, and other entities in the event of an emergency.

 

workimage

 

That, and many other questions, are worth asking, in Washington, and the majority of American states.

Don’t rely on pop media, social media censors, or bureaucrats to offer informed or trustworthy answers.

Related: CNN Goes For Broke, Pushes For Gov't-Mandated Jabs Imposed On Everyone | MRCTV

 

MRC Merch

MRC Merch