Would forced vaccinations be the line in the sand?

With the American media and political field currently going crazy about vaccinations and overplaying the fact that there are 100 cases of measles (no fatalities) among a field of over 300 million people who are mostly vaccinated or herd immune, it seems that the American public are buying the bull # hook, line, and sinker.

With that said, it isn't a far off proposition that vaccinations become forced. First the "necessary" ones for the well being of the public, and then whatever ones they see fit to give us down the line.

With the unrest currently going on in America, and many patriots standing their ground as to how far they will allow the government to go, would this be a line in the sand? Could something like this be a tipping point to riots on a large scale and mass nonconformity from the system?

If vaccinations became a forced thing, required for you to participate in your community and essentially to do anything, would you go along with it while huffing and puffing your displeasure on ATS and the rest of the internet, or would some of you actually take a stand against such actions?

I'm interested to hear the sentiment of the ATS public at the current time.

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

That's an open-ended supposition, because as it stands now, we don't truly know with any certainty what the inactive ingredients of these vaccines are--if you make them mandatory, it wouldn't even matter at that point, and the gov't would have absolute control over the vaccines at that point, and anything goes when something is mandatory.

As for a line in the sand--I don't honestly know what mine would be. I'm already pissed at both main parties for multiple reasons on each side, and even some aspects of the Libertarian Party proper. I dont' know if I have just one line...but to address your question more broadly, I would definitely say that forced injections of any type, or forced ingestion of anything, would be quite the breach of the spirit of our nation's constitution and the authorities that it provides the government.

With that said, I don't think that any politician would propose such a thing, but I wouldn't be surprised to find the beginnings of such a program on page 18,003 of the ACA. (that's just a random page number to make a point)

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

They have always wanted to use vaccines as weapons and have used these programs against other countries.You have natural defenses from being sprayed,and chemicals added to the food supply to lower the population , but when the body is pierced all of that is bypassed and the toxic chemicals act fast.Being a natural resident It is obvious to me it is no different than stabbing with a knife or shooting with a gun, It is an attack ON THE HIGHEST PREMISE OF LAW AND IS ILLEGAL PERIOD. Hitler would be very proud.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm with you there. Requiring vaccinations to attend public school is one thing. There's other options there. But forcing an injection on someone, I'd draw the line there. So what if you were to refuse? Gov would end up sending swat teams into people's homes so they can be subdued, restrained and given an injection. That scares the crap out of me. How many people would die by the hands of the government for refusing a vaccine?

originally posted by: supergravity
a reply to: TheNewRevolution

They have always wanted to use vaccines as weapons and have used these programs against other countries.You have natural defenses from being sprayed,and chemicals added to the food supply to lower the population , but when the body is pierced all of that is bypassed and the toxic chemicals act fast.Being a natural resident It is obvious to me it is no different than stabbing with a knife or shooting with a gun, It is an attack ON THE HIGHEST PREMISE OF LAW AND IS ILLEGAL PERIOD.

I agree.

They could put anything into a "vaccine".

Forced vaccines...bring it the f.ck on, I will not stand for it personally or for any member of my family.

I believe this is most likely a false flag to elicit a knee jerk sheeple reaction to comply with it.

Because let's be honest, the " vaccine" could as easily be a virus or anything else.

Do you trust the gov or pharmo industry?

I trust them as far as I can throw a fat girl.....not very far, especially if I can't verify personally their intent or the active substances.

F.ck them, they can't tell me I have to take anything.

First we alowed them to tell us what we can put in our bodies, now they want to tell us what we must let them put in our bodies?

Um no...not this guy!!!

If they try to force that poison on me i go apesh#t on them. Or ill move my ass as far away from society possible. All depends on the time and situation

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm with you there. Requiring vaccinations to attend public school is one thing. There's other options there. But forcing an injection on someone, I'd draw the line there. So what if you were to refuse? Gov would end up sending swat teams into people's homes so they can be subdued, restrained and given an injection. That scares the crap out of me. How many people would die by the hands of the government for refusing a vaccine?

More important...how many gov perps would die attempting this?

There are a lot more of us than them.

It wouldn't take long before they realized their mistake.

I volunteer to be the first guy the try to forcefully vaccinate.

I am dying anyhow.

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

Nazi Germany 1932.

There's no way to stay and not be affected. If Pharma gets the green light to vaccinate at the point of a gun and maintain 100% legal immunity, there are no practical limits to what they can do.

Transhumanism has officially arrived folks. You must have these needed improvements to meet the requirements to be human. Regular (e.g. defective) humans are a threat to be eliminated.

What's shocking is how easily the herd is controlled.

a reply to: newWorldSamurai

some thing smells here, why would mixing people that has been vaccinated with people that have not, be a problem ?

if the vaccine works , then they are in no danger from the unvaccinated .

Let us take a look at the reality of the "vaccination" issue using some points that get lost in the monologue.

First. The pharma companies make a PRODUCT. The companies are shareholder driven, for profit machines that seek to sell their product at the maximum price possible making the greatest amount of profit for the owners. These companies are NOT altruistic soulful systems seeking to keep people from getting sick. They have HUGE PR machines that do things like create stories using terms like "deniers" or "anti vacs" or even worse to sell their product. Vaccines are profitable because the PR people have played on fear, fear, fear of humans and not because they originate from a place of "helping humanity." I cannot stress this enough, to sell health is NOT PROFITABLE, but to sell on going treatments that lead to poor health is very profitable and each shareholder wants profit.

Second. There have been countless illnesses over the history of mankind that are no longer present and that died out long before the vacs came along. There is no connection between vacs and the absence of illness, only correlation. The beauty of their health PRODUCT is that they can say two things are both seem right because there is no proof: vacs cured polio and vacs do not cause harm - except to polio, and those who get sick from the vacs or in spite of the vacs are eliminated as by statistical computation, as are those who never got polio with or without a jab. It can be said that the reason diseases die out is because the collective human consciousness simply adjusts and that point of view is just as valid as the vacs did it. It can also be said it is possible that the myriad of ailments facing humanity now are a result of the vacs, which, given their ubiquity a birth lead to long term health related ailments that show up far enough down the road they cannot be tied to the jab = big profits to those who create a 20 year old's diabetes by jabbing them at two months.

Third. Let us take a look at the fervent champions of the vacs and their argument. The argument, which was entirely created by the pharma PR companies by the way, is this: "Those who fail to vaccinate their child put all children in danger. To be a good honorable member of society you must vaccinate YOUR child in order to prevent MY child from getting sick and failure to do so should make you a criminal."

That's good logic if you want to sell something, but if fails its own logic test. If the vacs prevent all sickness as they claim, then those who fail to vacs their children, or themselves, are only going to kill their own. The responsible comrades who do the right thing and BUY the product will be saved: darwinism. So we have to ask, according to the PR logic, why do those who don't care about their own health or their child's need to be concerned with the health of those who have immunized themselves to perfection. The vacs kids are supermen and women, those who fail to do so are nothing important anyway. Is getting sick really the worst thing ever?

Fourth. These people who create products that are directly injected into you have no oversight but their own selves. The FDA does NOT test a thing, it only looks over the testing given to them by the companies themselves and looks to decide of the PRODUCT is lawful by its own laws, safe is not their issue unless it has been PROVEN unsafe and that issue is a threat to commerce. The FDA regulates commerce, not health. There is no independent NGO that has any power over pharma products. Those who demand we all vaccinate our kids often want to know what is in the cereal the kids eat, but they are okay with not knowing what is in the shot they just put in those very same kids. I asked a DR. if he knew what was in the shots, he said no. Case closed on that.

Five. The PR COMPANIES for the pharma shareholders and the AMA have been used a one point of the "kill human choice" trident effort to reduce human choice to a for us or against us option. They have worked billions of dollars, billions of energy hours in concert with government and science to eliminate choice by simply demanding domain over the body we occupy. They have stomped on your right to rule over your own body by creating false hegelian arguments based on your fear of the unknown. They lie about everything and the population can't see this. Their goal is NOT money, they have plenty of that, but control and it has been too easy for them to control the body by controlling the minds ability to process choice.

Lastly. Makers of the flu vacs admit it doesn't deal with that most people get sick with over the winter (lack of sun is the issue here) owning up to the fact that only 1 in 10 sicknesses is the "flu" and those flu vacs are made to long in advance to be of much use - get your flu shot comrade it is the morally right thing to do! Makes of the vacs admit that the shots contain LIVE cancer viruses and there is nothing they can to about it. Given both of these are true, how can the PR created memes of the vaccination industry be seen as anything moral?

One final note. The creation of a vacs is done with dead tissue. A human is a living thing and there is no way to create a vaccination via a living process cell, only cells removed from their original environment can be used. So vacs, at best, could be said to kill a "polio virus" OUTSIDE its home environment since one cannot be developed in its native habitat. Really consider that idea, that in order to study something you must see it in its native reality that then be able to process that, but if you can only extract that thing from its home reality the only thing you know is how it behaves in the reality you have created - test tubes or animals.

The way back origins of the word pharmaceutical might interest some: something about the making of poisons...

originally posted by: crankyoldman
Let us take a look at the reality of the "vaccination" issue using some points that get lost in the monologue.

First. The pharma companies make a PRODUCT. The companies are shareholder driven, for profit machines that seek to sell their product at the maximum price possible making the greatest amount of profit for the owners. These companies are NOT altruistic soulful systems seeking to keep people from getting sick. They have HUGE PR machines that do things like create stories using terms like "deniers" or "anti vacs" or even worse to sell their product. Vaccines are profitable because the PR people have played on fear, fear, fear of humans and not because they originate from a place of "helping humanity." I cannot stress this enough, to sell health is NOT PROFITABLE, but to sell on going treatments that lead to poor health is very profitable and each shareholder wants profit.

Second. There have been countless illnesses over the history of mankind that are no longer present and that died out long before the vacs came along. There is no connection between vacs and the absence of illness, only correlation. The beauty of their health PRODUCT is that they can say two things are both seem right because there is no proof: vacs cured polio and vacs do not cause harm - except to polio, and those who get sick from the vacs or in spite of the vacs are eliminated as by statistical computation, as are those who never got polio with or without a jab. It can be said that the reason diseases die out is because the collective human consciousness simply adjusts and that point of view is just as valid as the vacs did it. It can also be said it is possible that the myriad of ailments facing humanity now are a result of the vacs, which, given their ubiquity a birth lead to long term health related ailments that show up far enough down the road they cannot be tied to the jab = big profits to those who create a 20 year old's diabetes by jabbing them at two months.

Third. Let us take a look at the fervent champions of the vacs and their argument. The argument, which was entirely created by the pharma PR companies by the way, is this: "Those who fail to vaccinate their child put all children in danger. To be a good honorable member of society you must vaccinate YOUR child in order to prevent MY child from getting sick and failure to do so should make you a criminal."

That's good logic if you want to sell something, but if fails its own logic test. If the vacs prevent all sickness as they claim, then those who fail to vacs their children, or themselves, are only going to kill their own. The responsible comrades who do the right thing and BUY the product will be saved: darwinism. So we have to ask, according to the PR logic, why do those who don't care about their own health or their child's need to be concerned with the health of those who have immunized themselves to perfection. The vacs kids are supermen and women, those who fail to do so are nothing important anyway. Is getting sick really the worst thing ever?

Fourth. These people who create products that are directly injected into you have no oversight but their own selves. The FDA does NOT test a thing, it only looks over the testing given to them by the companies themselves and looks to decide of the PRODUCT is lawful by its own laws, safe is not their issue unless it has been PROVEN unsafe and that issue is a threat to commerce. The FDA regulates commerce, not health. There is no independent NGO that has any power over pharma products. Those who demand we all vaccinate our kids often want to know what is in the cereal the kids eat, but they are okay with not knowing what is in the shot they just put in those very same kids. I asked a DR. if he knew what was in the shots, he said no. Case closed on that.

Five. The PR COMPANIES for the pharma shareholders and the AMA have been used a one point of the "kill human choice" trident effort to reduce human choice to a for us or against us option. They have worked billions of dollars, billions of energy hours in concert with government and science to eliminate choice by simply demanding domain over the body we occupy. They have stomped on your right to rule over your own body by creating false hegelian arguments based on your fear of the unknown. They lie about everything and the population can't see this. Their goal is NOT money, they have plenty of that, but control and it has been too easy for them to control the body by controlling the minds ability to process choice.

Lastly. Makers of the flu vacs admit it doesn't deal with that most people get sick with over the winter (lack of sun is the issue here) owning up to the fact that only 1 in 10 sicknesses is the "flu" and those flu vacs are made to long in advance to be of much use - get your flu shot comrade it is the morally right thing to do! Makes of the vacs admit that the shots contain LIVE cancer viruses and there is nothing they can to about it. Given both of these are true, how can the PR created memes of the vaccination industry be seen as anything moral?

One final note. The creation of a vacs is done with dead tissue. A human is a living thing and there is no way to create a vaccination via a living process cell, only cells removed from their original environment can be used. So vacs, at best, could be said to kill a "polio virus" OUTSIDE its home environment since one cannot be developed in its native habitat. Really consider that idea, that in order to study something you must see it in its native reality that then be able to process that, but if you can only extract that thing from its home reality the only thing you know is how it behaves in the reality you have created - test tubes or animals.

The way back origins of the word pharmaceutical might interest some: something about the making of poisons...

Everything you said and.....

Polio is linked to the removal of the tonsils.

Polio became an epidemic when they were removing tonsils wholesale.

Once they stopped polio went away.

Now at the same time polio VAC's came about.

So was it leaving tonsils in that stopped polio or was it the vacs?

Seeing how polio was never so bad until they began removing kids tonsils enmass.

It seems clear to me removing them was the root cause of the devastation of an entire generation of children.

The VAC's didn't save them, letting them keep their tonsils did.

So far it seems that there are plenty of people that see past the pharmaceutical scam that is marketed as "better health for all" and many that would draw the line at anything being forced into their bodies.

I wonder if there is anyone out there that would actually be ok with it were it to actually happen? Perhaps many will state that they wouldn't stand for it now, but when the time comes would they roll over and comply anyway?

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
a reply to: SlapMonkey
I'm with you there. Requiring vaccinations to attend public school is one thing. There's other options there. But forcing an injection on someone, I'd draw the line there. So what if you were to refuse? Gov would end up sending swat teams into people's homes so they can be subdued, restrained and given an injection. That scares the crap out of me. How many people would die by the hands of the government for refusing a vaccine?

I disagree with mandatory vaccinations in schools, too, and here's why: I'm quite certain that in every local jurisdiction in America, there is some sort of truancy law that mandates children between certain ages attend school. Since there are laws on the books that force children into learning institutions, I find mandatory vaccinations to be basically enforced by law. Now, there are ways to exempt your children, but I don't believe that exists everywhere; where it doesn't, I disagree with those mandatory-vaccination "laws."

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

Sadly, there are...all you need to do is an internet search for "poll americans support mandatory vaccination."

Here's an example from the Pew Research Center:



It's not even a party-line, divisive thing, either, which is surprising:



It's really a disturbing thing if these numbers are correct...Americans, at about a 2:1 (or, sometimes, 3:1) ratio, would be okay with mandated childhood vaccines.

I highly doubt the government will make it illegal to not vaccinate. They'll never break down your door and force a vaccination at the point of a gun - get real. However, they will continue to not allow children in public schools without a valid vaccination record. You may also see public businesses not allowing access without a valid vaccination record. Could get a little messy, but I could see Disney, for example, not allowing children into the park without a valid vaccination record. I could see public places like museums, or even movie theaters doing the same. Crazy speculation? Maybe, but I could see that happening before I could see the government forcing vaccinations.

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

Hmmm, interesting situation. First of all, I'm not sure the Feds can mandate vaccinations. Based on the way things are set up now, everything seems to be handled at the State level. So...they might try but I'd guess they'd have to do it through the Commerce clause of the Constitution and they'd try it incrementally, i.e., use the Fed nexus with education funding to mandate childhood immunizations.

Then the lawsuits would fly and 10 years later the Supreme Court would have to say its o.k. (and they would as corrupt as they are).

I'd guess that anyone over the age of 50 doesn't have to worry about this. The millennials, largely, don't think for themselves anyway, so they won't care. I have friends in their early 30's with kids and they basically pick and choose how they handle this and they seem to prefer to delay the MMR until later in their child's life, say 5 or 6 years old. But a lot of them homeschool too, so....who's to say how they'll take it.

For me personally, a line in the sand...I'd have to see how this plays out, but at my age, I've got not much to worry about.

Forced vaccinations eh?

Was that like people being forced to buy healthcare?

Was that like people being forced to buy home insurance?

Was that like people being forced to buy auto insurance?

Oh it's not a question of if, but when.

Zeig Heil!

a reply to: TheNewRevolution

No, forced vaccinations wouldn't be the line in the sand, and no, this isn't going to happen anyways.

a reply to: neo96

Depends on what your definition of "forced" is. You don't have to buy health insurance, you can pay the penalty. You don't have to buy a home and you don't have to buy a car. No one is going to execute you, if that's what you mean by force.

No, I do not think they will force you to take vaccines at the barrel of a gun, hell, they don't even have to fine you.

But notice how more and more things are moving in the direction of ID cards and the Rea lID system? How simple would it be for a requirement of getting one of those IDs in the future being a valid vaccination record?

No, the nonconformists will not be literally forced to do anything, just like technically we are not "forced" to buy healthcare. But they will be penalized and made into a lower class of citizen by not being able to be a part of society and the herd. It is an extremely simple process to create if they wanted to.