Childcare rebates could be denied to anti-vaccination parents under new Federal Government laws

originally posted by: scghst1
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

Agreed.

I've noticed a massive increase of shill-like posts on ATS the last few years or so. Every time anyone posts as much as one syllable against any aspect of the establishment, you can confidently expect an avalanche of pro-establishment shill comments to quickly follow, without fail.

They think their shill-skills will convert ATS members to their way of thinking, and it's amusing to watch their attempts, lol.

originally posted by: doobydoll

originally posted by: scghst1
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

Agreed.

I've noticed a massive increase of shill-like posts on ATS the last few years or so. Every time anyone posts as much as one syllable against any aspect of the establishment, you can confidently expect an avalanche of pro-establishment shill comments to quickly follow, without fail.

They think their shill-skills will convert ATS members to their way of thinking, and it's amusing to watch their attempts, lol.

Considering that pharma make far more money from treatment of vaccine preventable diseases than the vaccines themselves I would suggest that the anti-vax mob are getting paid better by them.

a reply to: MysterX

I've not read such a brazenly biased, deluded or just outright pharma backside kissing post as yours...in, i don't know how long.

My post has nothing to do with pharma backside kissing. It has to do with the welfare and safety of my kids, their kids, my neighbors kids, the kids at my kids schools, and the f*#%ing twats that are trying to kill and maim them with their anti-vax bulls%$t.

That statement is not hyperbole. It is truth. Measles, for one example, was virtually eliminated by vaccine. It nearly wiped out a disease that killed between 400 and 700 people in the United States within 10 years, then when we took our eye off the ball, it came back with a vengeance in 1988-1990, and again this last year. This is not a joke, it has real world consequences.

Smallpox and rinderpest have been 'eradicated' in the world-wide population by vaccines. Poliomylitis may be next. This does not mean the virus or bacteria no longer exists, it means that humans have developed an ("artificial") immunity to them. If that immunity is allowed to slip, the disease may come back.

'Big Pharma' do not get rich off established vaccines - it is exactly the opposite - see: "Big Pharma" is funding the Anti-Vax 'movement', so if you are hearing 'shill' or 'backside kissing' going on, you had better get your hearing checked and put on some lip gloss, because you are the one on your knees puckering up.

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: doobydoll

originally posted by: scghst1
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

Agreed.

I've noticed a massive increase of shill-like posts on ATS the last few years or so. Every time anyone posts as much as one syllable against any aspect of the establishment, you can confidently expect an avalanche of pro-establishment shill comments to quickly follow, without fail.

They think their shill-skills will convert ATS members to their way of thinking, and it's amusing to watch their attempts, lol.

Considering that pharma make far more money from treatment of vaccine preventable diseases than the vaccines themselves I would suggest that the anti-vax mob are getting paid better by them.

QUIET with that logic!

First, my general opinion on the matter pretty falls into what Dr. Paul says in this travesty of an interview:

www.msnbc.com...

I have religiously vaccinated all of my children, because I have sailed across the world and back again, and I can tell you, not vaccinating them seemed repellant to me, but it was a choice...I believe that to be a fundamental aspect of western culture that is truly being eroded. The right to chose how we live our lives.

As far as the anti-vaxxers are concerned, all I hear is pseudo-science and conjecture based on flimsy, anecdotal evidence.

To which I respond w/ the following:

From your own archives



As well as the most to the point explanation I have ever heard on the matter:

i wouldn't want someone's un-vaccinated child in the same daycare as mine , you have the right to not vaccinate your child but i have the right to keep my children protected . home school them and you don't have to worry a reply to: ItVibrates

a reply to: doompornjunkie

What you miss is this is a pluralistic society. There seems to be an agenda to 'homogenize' everyone into the same cubby-hole.

That's the source of these laws. If the medical crowd had their way, we'd all be wired for sound, checking every vital sign in the name of 'prevention' bleating that it would 'save lives'.

Same for every other vested interest group out there.

The so-called common good button is pushed to the point of gov't control gone rampant.

It's those of us that see the big picture that says this is nothing but a control mechanism sugar coated with the 'right thing to do'.

Quality of life doesn't have a vested interest group watching out for us to counter the myopic specialists. That falls to us.

originally posted by: sstech
First, my general opinion on the matter pretty falls into what Dr. Paul says in this travesty of an interview:

From your own archives

As well as the most to the point explanation I have ever heard on the matter:

Don't ever refer to Next Level Bull Sh!7 as a source regardless of who posts it. Because that is literally all that is, Bull Shi7. I was vaccinated as well and I am perfectly fine, but my little sister is not, who was entirely fine before her second rounds of MMR shots.

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: rnaa

I've not read such a brazenly biased, deluded or just outright pharma backside kissing post as yours...in, i don't know how long.

So, thanks for that.

BTW, if you happen to be on medications, I wouldn't drive or operate complicated machinery, it seems whatever it is you're taking or doing, if anything, is screwing up your higher reasoning skills.

No brain injury indeed!

just replace any country for america...

originally posted by: ItVibrates

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children will miss out on government benefits of up to $15,000 per child under a new measure announced by Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Childcare rebates could be denied to anti-vaccination parents under new Federal Government laws

Sorry Mods if this has been posted, I did search for it.

This news really bothers me even tho I'm not a parent. I dont know whats next, the government mandating abortions? euthanasia? where does this end?.

Oh, and this is being supported by the opposition too, so I guess we have Big Pharma getting their way no matter what.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said it was a sensible step.

"We believe fundamentally in the science of vaccinations and we fundamentally believe that policy should be made by the best evidence and the best science," he said.

Fascism creeps.

That's the unintended consequence of having the state support you. They pay the bills, they eventually will want to call the shots.

originally posted by: Pardon?

Considering that pharma make far more money from treatment of vaccine preventable diseases than the vaccines themselves I would suggest that the anti-vax mob are getting paid better by them.

Not when the most effective treatment is simply a massive dose of Vitamin A for undernourished and malnourished children, as it is for measles... and not when they have international contracts to provide said vaccines for every child (and adult) they can stick a needle into. The economics have superceded the medicine and the science is non-existent. And before you scream foul, please show me one -- just one -- double blind study done on vaccines, especially measles. You cannot, because it has not been done, for obvious reasons.

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: AdamuBureido
a reply to: Grimpachi

ad-homs?
that all you got?

i guess logic isn't your bag then,
or JAMA for that matter...

1-Ad-hom? No

Before accusing someone of such it would be pertinent to make sure it actually applied.

My post didn't even resemble an ad-hom.

1-It is the simple truth that I honestly don't care what Jon Rappoport wrote in a blog.

If you have something from the Journal of the American Medical Association I may be inclined to care.2- So until then you know where I stand.

HELLO!
1-

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments. When used inappropriately, it is a fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.

en.wikipedia.org...
you dismiss the source, unexamined at that...
2-proof you don't read or do due diligence, link to pdf was provided.
but your brain shut down...
allowing you to wallow in smug ignorance
[must be the thimerosal]

originally posted by: doobydoll

originally posted by: scghst1
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

Agreed.

I've noticed a massive increase of shill-like posts on ATS the last few years or so. Every time anyone posts as much as one syllable against any aspect of the establishment, you can confidently expect an avalanche of pro-establishment shill comments to quickly follow, without fail.

They think their shill-skills will convert ATS members to their way of thinking, and it's amusing to watch their attempts, lol.

Indeed! But let them continue... it's back-firing on them:

News coverage of vaccine controversies drives down support for vaccines

Too many people already know better than to trust the government, with more realizing it every day, exactly because of this kind of bully nonsense. I cannot explain the others!

originally posted by: NavyDoc

That's the unintended consequence of having the state support you. They pay the bills, they eventually will want to call the shots.

Yes, you are exactly right.

The Golden Rule: Those with the gold make the rules. One more reason I'm sure the present income inequality is by design. This is exactly how the PTB want it to be.

originally posted by: scghst1
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

the truth is even scarier
99% are actually unpaid

that's how it is when you belong to a cult

Vaccinegate: jonrappoport.wordpress.com...

i also see the usual denials of brain damage, and false claims regarding diseases returning if we stop using vaccines

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” —Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977 www.uvm.edu...

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT [diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine] reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” —Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” —DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 1986.

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune [via vaccination], according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella [German measles], a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” (Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.) www.vaclib.org...

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” (Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, ‘Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,’ 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.)

“Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” (JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer.) The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules…”


“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” (Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.)

originally posted by: AdamuBureido

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: AdamuBureido
a reply to: Grimpachi

ad-homs?
that all you got?

i guess logic isn't your bag then,
or JAMA for that matter...

1-Ad-hom? No

Before accusing someone of such it would be pertinent to make sure it actually applied.

My post didn't even resemble an ad-hom.

1-It is the simple truth that I honestly don't care what Jon Rappoport wrote in a blog.

If you have something from the Journal of the American Medical Association I may be inclined to care.2- So until then you know where I stand.

HELLO!
1-
An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments. When used inappropriately, it is a fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.

you dismiss the source, unexamined at that...
2-proof you don't read or do due diligence, link to pdf was provided.
but your brain shut down...
allowing you to wallow in smug ignorance
[must be the thimerosal]

Dismissing a source is not an ad-hominem attack. I didn't attack the sources character nor did I attack your character.

Now your comment about smug ignorance is an ad-hominem attack.

Let us review

"means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments."

As I said I don't care about someone's blog which you presented as evidence which by you presenting it was an informal fallacy.

"False authority (single authority) – using an expert of dubious credentials or using only one opinion to sell a product or idea. Related to the appeal to authority fallacy."

Not only do I not care about someone's personal blog I also don't care what someone writes on Facebook to me they are about the same thing. Posting someone's blog post as evidence on a scientific matter is about the same as pulling a random opinionated post from ATS as evidence on a scientific matter.

As far as a pdf goes if it was attached to the blog post then no, I didn't see it if you wish to present it then do so but don't expect people to go searching through blogs to find them.

A 10 minute video on contaminated vaccines, very interesting. Dr. Garth Nicolson, microbiologist.
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: scghst1

Oh, shut up.

This site is rampant w/ lies, half-truths, conjecture, and nonsense.

W/o a proper physicians diagnosis, there is no telling what caused what ever problem it is that you think that you have, regardless of where you, a person w/ what would appear to be no medical training, thinks it came from, or whom you wish to blame.

I sourced a video straight from this site. I know the basic history behind their ability to post those videos on this site.

Do yourself a favor and learn some basic debate decorum and manners.

NVM