It's really amazing how brazen the they are getting. Forcing things into people's bodies against their will is unacceptable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7wBwOEsw2I&feature=player_embedded I like this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4DQiNUneqA
Reminds me of the anthrax shots in the Marines none of us wanted because they weren't tested long term nor were they proven to provide any resistance to anthrax whatsoever. I was just weeks from getting out and they made it very clear it didn't matter if you were getting out the very next day, everyone was required to get the shots or face serious punishment! ...ahh good times... actually all the shots were mandatory incl flu shot and many they wouldn't even say what they were lol. I'm sure you understand why they're doing it. They feel if they have less sick nurses during an outbreak they will be able to better treat patients. So, their intentions are, by THEIR theory good, however they are taking away freedoms on a theory which I feel is over the line.
It's not forced and nobody is being made to do anything against thier will. It's voluntary... it just happens that if you don't volunteer, you can't work as a medical professional. A bit like washing your hands and staying sober. You don't have to do it, but if you don't, you can't work as a nurse.
You are required to lots of things in lots of different jobs. If you don't want to do what is required of you in jobs, you can, but it means you aren't allowed to do that job.
I am very cautious about vaccines especially in the young. They often contain mercury based bits and pieces that can cause problems to our immune system. A bit like the dreaded three in one Vaccine in the UK I know for a FACT that Tony Blairs kids did not have the three in one vaccine despite him standing up says that it was compulsary for everyone else.
"bits and pieces"? I see you have done your reasearch..... The mercury and "bits and pieces" found in vaccinations are at levels which pose an insignificant risk. And before you point out that they are 100 times higher than what is acceptable in food, realise that the reason for this is because we eat a lot of food and have relatively few vaccinations. How do you know that for a fact? I'd like to see some evidence, ya know, besides your assertions which we are expected to take your word for.
Sometimes it is what people dont say tell us the truth. If Tony Blair's kids had been vaccinated with the three in one, then this would have been on the news. I remember that he refused to comment. I don 't have a 5 year old tape recordings of the news to show you as evidence funnily enough....... The Bits and Pieces I shant pretend to understand, but then again the chances of you understanding 100% are pretty low too. Basically mercury gets converted to a neurotoxin in the body. There are documented cases of mother in Japan not being affected whilst the children were. Thus since we are talking about Tony Blairs kids and childen are more vulnerable to the mercury fillers and preservatives A link on it from a respected source. http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228#thi
Because taking a vaccine that has caused problems in the past is just like washing your hands Ron Paul talking about the 1976 swine flu vaccine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bilx-mb1OtM
What a load of crap. It simply is not possible for you to know that they never got a particular shot. Why would you make such and obviously absurd lie?
Irrelevant. It's a requirement of the job.. Feel free to refuse, but if you do you aren't allowed to do that job. Which makes it voluntary and by no means "forced". What part of that don't you understand? Oh so because he didn't comment that means he done the thing you are claiming? What a load of shit. He didn't comment because his children are entitled to medical privacy just like everyone else.
When you take on a Prime Ministers job you make sacrifices of stuff like that. Privacy etc. His kids had the single jab. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-104889/Blair-asked-Did-Leo-France-separate-jabs.html
Did you even watch the video? They don't get to say "screw you do what we say or lose you job." You seem not to understand that this decision was made by some bureaucrats, i.e., not even by selected officials who can (theoretically) be held accountable or by the hospitals. You also seem to not know (or care?) that these vaccine manufacturers have been given protection from any lawsuits as a result of their insufficiently tested vaccines' causing harm. BTW, people like stOx are the ones who allow the government to get away this this villainy. They don't get that fact that the government and the people who really control it are not concerned in the least for us. "Take it-- it's the law!" "They hate us for our freedumbs!" Anyone who actually cares about facts and logic and is not satisfied with "Take it because we said so, prol!" should watch the video with Ron Paul and look at those other videos and read about squalene and other adjuvents. Take it because the government told you to, prol! is slave mentality.
It's hard for me to come away with a coherant point when you rant so incoherantly. It just seems to be a hodge podge of hippy bullshit and rhetoric you have heard somewhere else. The fact is it's not forced, as you deceitfully stated, it's completely voluntary. It just happens to be a requirement of the job. It makes sense that if you are a medical professional you be vaccinated against highly infectious diseases. If they don't want the vaccination, that's fine, they don't have to have it. But then they can't be nurses. No he doesn't, and more to the point, his children certainly don't. Everyone is entitled to medical privacy. Again, you are making that up. You are knowingly stating something as fact which you can't possibly know. Even if it what you say wasn't a blatent lie, so what? You can get the single jabs for your children too, it hasn't been outlawed and the triple jab isn't compulsary.
Um, while there can be rewards to volunteer, there can't be negative consequences to choosing NOT to or it treads into the area of mandatory and even forced. If it were agreed to before taking the job I could see it as a job requirement without an option. It's pretty obvious your thoughts on what qualifies as voluntary and forced are much different than most others in this thread. Assuming you have a desire to understand 2 sided rational thoughts rather than pick one and fight about it while ignoring the other has any credibility, you surely see this.
If you don't have enough interest to listen to what Ron Paul said about more people being killed by the vaccine than by the flu in 1976, why are you interested enough to keep talking about something you clearly don't care about? When government bureaucrats tell people they cannot work or send their children tot a school they pay for without doing something, that something is mandated. This is not difficult. If you don't let us put something into your body that you don't want, you can't work here. What if the governor said "You can't work here unless you have sex with me." Hey, it's not forced is it? Are you kidding me? If you like vaccines so much take them yourself. Is that a tough concept? For anyone who actually, cares here's some interesting information: Legal immunity set for swine flu vaccine makers http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31971355/ns/health-swine_flu/ "The strain itself killed one person and hospitalized 13. However, side-effects from the vaccine caused 25 deaths." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals concern of neurologists over 25 deaths in America http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ologists-25-deaths-America.html#ixzz0SzKeex1L
The point is, reseg, people aren't "Forcing things into people's bodies against their will". They do have the option to refuse. The title, and the scaremongering, is misleading at best and a flat out lie at worst. Briant i think you need to have a sit down and decide what it is you are arguing against. You seem to have ditched your deceitful claim that people are being "forced against thier will" to have the vaccination and switched to arguing against the safety of the vaccination. So when you have figured out which position will be easiest for you to defend let me know so i can start dismantling it and pointing out your intentional deception.
Authorities have actually suggested that the single shot should be banned. Also that by not having the triple shot that your children should not be admitted into school. I am quite flattered to be called a hippie Makes me think of surfing and relaxing Normally I'm labelled a militant right wing U made my day... I guess Tony must be a mate of yours and confided to you Leo had the triple jab, and didnt get a single done in Paris that year. Wink. He knew that the triple jab was a greater risk for his kids yet was quite prepared to let yours (a big assumption) take that risk. The sooner you realize that no goverment on earth actually gives a mother f about you or me the better. Your smarter than that step out of the bubble. Give you another example Vitamins Humble vitamins The recommended doses are done by research by drugs companies. Think about it. They want you to die at 60. Dont even start me on Novel H1N1...
If I said you have the right not to pay you taxes, I would be telling the truth, huh? Are you serious? I'll try again, when you punish people for not allowing you to put something into their bodies (something for which the manufactures are protected from lawsuits), you are forcing them. "Oh, so this is you job and you need to pay off you student loans. No worries, I'm sure you can find something else. Oh, wait we have already exported all the other good jobs to a slave labor camp. So sorry."