NRL Under fire as stars refusing flu shots face blunt ultimatum

new s.com.au

The Queensland Government has confirmed three Gold Coast Titans players who refused a flu shot have been stood down while the sport’s flu-jab policy is reviewed.

This afternoon, Queensland’s Chief Medical Officer revealed three players – Bryce Cartwright, Nathan Peats and Brian Kelly — had been stood down by the NRL while the ARLC reviews its stance on anti-vaccination.

According to Nine News, the trio are unable to train until they either have the flu vaccination or provide a genuine medical reason why they cannot.

About ten players across the NRL reportedly refused the flu jab, and Australian Rugby League Commission (ARLC) chairman Peter V’landys said anyone who didn’t sign a waiver would not be allowed to play. He said if they did sign it, they would be permitted to play.

However, new reports today suggested Cartwright and fellow objectors would be stood down even if they do sign the waiver as the NRL faces pressure from state governments to comply with strict health guidelines.

Nine sports presenter Cameron Williams and Channel 7 rugby league reporter Chris Garry reported the government is going to stand by a “no jab, no play” stance endorsed by Prime Minister Scott Morrison earlier this week.

This is ridiculous. I personally believe this is a violation of a persons right, which is that they have the right to choose what is placed inside their own body. I am of the belief that this right over-rides the "right" of someone not wanting to play a game of rugby (football) with them because someone else has said "no" to placing foreign objects inside their own body.

Come on. It's getting ridiculous.

I also heard from some news interviewer (caster) having an argument with a politician the other day and essentially it was about placing a government covid-19 tracing app on everyone's phone and the politician was opposing it. Saying she didn't trust the government. And the news interviewer (caster) was giving the argument "doesn't a citizen have a social responsibility. An obligation to act as the benefit of society".

Ooooh it made me angry...

a reply to: DaRAGE

You dont think they are acting in your best interest? Why would you ever think the government would slowly euthanize the population? I guess the microwaves in the airports are not cooking the public fast enough. :-/

a reply to: DaRAGE

Divide and conquer, simple war tactics.

I agree with a persons natural right to choose what happens to their body, but there is no right imo to play a sport that earns a huge salary. Nobody is stopping anyone "play" the game though.

And the biggie here is a person's right not to be tracked with a forced app.

Basically, it is being forced on people to USE a mobile phone... THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST, because THAT is how the population will be ultimately controlled.

Where you are.
Where you go.
Where you shouldn't go.
How you get there.
Who you see.
When you see them.
What you read.
What you write.
What your habits are.
What you buy.
What you sell.
What you like.
What you don't like.
When you sleep.
Where you work.
Where you play.
When you work.
How much you earn.
How much you spend.
How much you owe.
How much you save.
What you are a member of.
Your political views.
Your diet.
Your medications.
Your education.
The games you play.
The plans you make.
The friends you make.
The rules you break.
Who you break them with.
Where you holiday.
Your health condition.
Your psycological condition.
Your religion.
Your music tastes.
etc etc etc ....

How you basically function in every way as a person.

"Human" no longer applies to the "algorithm".

20 20 vision for big brother on who....WHAT we are.

Ditch the phones and be humans again. They make people stupid regardless of their personal advantages and human communication is becoming a series of one liner texts and emails with little or no conversation face to face or at least via a normal telephone without the lag.

We are ANALOGUE beings but being forced into a DIGITAL age. Perhaps this is an inevitable evolution but I for one want to enjoy myself and others a little longer before we become just another computer on a ball of dirt communicating on a simple binary level. I have always enjoyed the noughts and ones AND everthing in between.

Sent from my old tower computer built out of bits from the local dump and ebay auctions.

they won't make players take the jab before the comp kicks off in 3 weeks, and they won't make folks get the app to work

i'd actually like them to say you can't go to work if you don't have the app, epic comedy would ensue. desk jockeys unite... must advise gubment

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: DaRAGE

You dont think they are acting in your best interest? Why would you ever think the government would slowly euthanize the population? I guess the microwaves in the airports are not cooking the public fast enough. :-/

I'm not saying that the government is not acting in my best interests. I'm not saying that vaccine companies are not acting in our best interests. I'm not saying that the NRL is not acting in our best interests.

I'm saying that as an individual I determine and should absolutely have the right to choose what goes into my body and what does not.

I'm saying that the act of a citizen being socially responsible, an obligation to act as the benefit of society, should not impede upon their own individual rights. Everyone is a member of society. Society doesn't always agree with one another. Just look at politics. Just look at idea's of abortion.

So for instance. Just imagine that in the future nanobots are created and most of society likes the nanobots and allow them into their body because of what they can do to help them. But they are a new invention and noone knows the long term effects. Nanobots are highly advertised and praised in the media. Imagine that 70% of society likes and takes up these nanobots and have them injected into their body. Now imagine that the majority of society tell you, through the mass media that you are irresponsible for NOT having the nanobots injected into your body. They have a lot of benefits. However you have been researching them from day one. You have found information that they cause autism in 10% of people and cancerous growths in another 10%. But it isn't being reported in the news. Your mother died of cancer and it was a traumatic experience for you. With that knowledge you decide to take your own life in your own hands and refuse the decision to inject nanobots into your body. you get called an "anti-nanobotist". You get called out for not doing your part for society. Being socially irresponsible. You are called these things because anyone who isn't injected has a chance to spread a new virus that is spreading that has a 2% mortality rate, where as if you are injected with nanobots the chance to spread the disease goes from 90% to 50%. You're not being "socially responsible".

I don't know. i'm a bit drunk. But you get the picture.

Individual rights vs social responsibility.

I don't trust the government. I don't trust profit organisations nor non-for-profit organistations and I don't trust other people.
I don't trust the mainstream media or media in general.

I'm not an anti-vaccine person at all. (even though they are profit organisations)

I'm just saying an individuals rights should come before the "obligation to society" or "socially responsible" as every member of society have those same rights... and they should not be impeded. Nor should it be tolerated.

a reply to: DaRAGE

Seems like they'd have an easy time finding a doc willing to write them their exemption letter for a bit of money. That's how that goes in the US at least.

originally posted by: DaRAGE

I also heard from some news interviewer (caster) having an argument with a politician the other day and essentially it was about placing a government covid-19 tracing app on everyone's phone and the politician was opposing it. Saying she didn't trust the government. And the news interviewer (caster) was giving the argument "doesn't a citizen have a social responsibility. An obligation to act as the benefit of society".

How exactly do rugby players and sportscasters benefit society?

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

How exactly do rugby players and sportscasters benefit society?

ppl don't lynch politicians when they can cheer a rugby side

originally posted by: Emit1

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

How exactly do rugby players and sportscasters benefit society?

ppl don't lynch politicians when they can cheer a rugby side

...which is why we should go back 2,000 years and strike up the gladiatorial arenas. Politicians who are found to being either corrupt or those who cost us more than they benefit us then have to fight for their lives in front of live spectators and on PPV. Two birds, one stone.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: DaRAGE

I also heard from some news interviewer (caster) having an argument with a politician the other day and essentially it was about placing a government covid-19 tracing app on everyone's phone and the politician was opposing it. Saying she didn't trust the government. And the news interviewer (caster) was giving the argument "doesn't a citizen have a social responsibility. An obligation to act as the benefit of society".

How exactly do rugby players and sportscasters benefit society?

It’s not about the rugby players. It’s about being forced to take a vaccine if you want to belong to the New Normal.

I watched an interview with a Doctor last night saying that having a flu jab increases the amount of ACE2 receptors

the more you have of them the higher the chance of getting infected of COVID19, he also mentioned lots of other things that increases the amount of ACE2 receptors

hi mum

After reading up on the 1976 swine flu vaccinations there is no way I will willingly accept a rushed vaccine, without a pretty bloody good reason.

If its just the regular flu shot that's a bit different to me.

Queensland Health Minister Stephen Miles accused the NRL of breaking its own plan to safely resume play amid the coronavirus outbreak.

How can they use the "Novel" Corona Virus as a push to get the Flu Vaccine?
Two completely different animals.

a reply to: Jamie2018

I was thinking exactly the same.

We have been constantly told this virus has nothing to do with the flu and that flu related vaccinations will have no effect whatsoever on COVID-19.

So why are these people being forced to have it?
What is the reasoning behind this?

originally posted by: Irishhaf
After reading up on the 1976 swine flu vaccinations there is no way I will willingly accept a rushed vaccine, without a pretty bloody good reason.

If its just the regular flu shot that's a bit different to me.

If anyone wants the regular flu shot, that's fine with me. But if someone does NOT want it, under no circumstances should they ever be forced or coerced into getting it. By the CDC's own admission, it's often less than 10% effective. Every single person I know who gets a flu shot every single year, still has the flu sometimes. To be FORCED into such a basically useless vaccine is insane.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Jamie2018

I was thinking exactly the same.

We have been constantly told this virus has nothing to do with the flu and that flu related vaccinations will have no effect whatsoever on COVID-19.

So why are these people being forced to have it?
What is the reasoning behind this?

TH
2:55 / 28:01
Bill Gates' Plan to Vaccinate the World.... Mr. Eugenics ?

youtu.be...


How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health
youtu.be...

a reply to: DaRAGE

This is crazy! Why would anyone care, if they themselves ARE vaccinated? If they believe the vaccine is protecting them, why do they care if someone else does not take the vaccine.

I'm all for certain vaccines (Polio, Smallpox), but my naturally-trained immune system has only been sick (aside from food poisoning) maybe once in 20 years, with no flu vaccine. Meantime, others my age or younger who get it annually seem to get sick multiple times every year.

I'm not suggesting it doesn't work against those particular strains of that particular virus, I just think for people withstrong immune systems, there's no point to it - and, a naturally-trained immune system is probably more effectove against illness in general - without potential side effects.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: DaRAGE

You dont think they are acting in your best interest? Why would you ever think the government would slowly euthanize the population? I guess the microwaves in the airports are not cooking the public fast enough. :-/

It's more likely that not enough people are traveling by plane -- poor people can't afford to board them, which means they don't get zapped. 90% of people are poor. It could never be "fast" enough unless people have the liquid to go on vacations that required air travel.

There is some satire in here; before ya'll think weird things.

a reply to: Jamie2018

whether the CV19 is a flu virus or not depends on what the speaker is trying to sell you.