Vaccines Laced with Birth Control

www.thinktwice.com...

I do not know if this site is providing accurate information or not. However, according to them vaccines administered in Latin America are laced with hCG. The human hormone, when injected, serves as a type of birth control. Tetanus shots are given to these people every couple of years instead of once every ten.

It looks like there MAY be a conspiracy to lace vaccines with birth control.

I'll let ya'll read it and see what you think.
www.thinktwice.com...

If that is true, and these women have been made infertile, I hope they begin
a class action and sue the pants off those companies and WHO.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
... according to them vaccines administered in Latin America are laced with hCG. The human hormone, when injected, serves as a type of birth control. Tetanus shots are given to these people every couple of years instead of once every ten.

It looks like there MAY be a conspiracy to lace vaccines with birth control.

well, that looks like a way that the U.S. can
--by 1% of separation--

have some control over the number of 'un-documented aliens' which are
flooding over the southern border every day,
some of whom are pregnant....expecting the babies born on American soil
to become instant citizens, thus affording the mothers' citizenship also.

maybe the US drug & pharmaceutical corps. are instrumental in this activity
as 'pay-backs' for all the perks, tax advantages etcetera, awarded the industry!

?if fewer illegal-aliens, are pregnant when entering the U.S., it stands to reason
the U.S. will save $$$ in the 'entitlements' the Fed. has to appropriate for 'indigent' dependents/food stamps/WIC/eventual schooling/Day Care/ etc etc etc

That website has other articles that scare me more than the idea of making women infertile.

Secret Government Database of Vaccine-Damaged Children
www.thinktwice.com...

How Are Vaccines Made?

Vaccine production is a disgusting procedure. To begin, one must first acquire the disease germ -- a toxic bacterium or a live virus. To make a "live" vaccine, the live virus must be attenuated, or weakened for human use. This is accomplished by serial passage -- passing the virus through animal tissue several times to reduce its potency. For example, measles virus is passed through chick embryos, polio virus through monkey kidneys, and the rubella virus through human diploid cells -- the dissected organs of an aborted fetus! "Killed" vaccines are "inactivated" through heat, radiation, or chemicals.

The weakened germ must then be strengthened with adjuvants (antibody boosters) and stabilizers. This is done by adding drugs, antibiotics, and toxic disinfectants to the concoction: neomycin, streptomycin, sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum hydrochloride, sorbitol, hydrolized gelatin, formaldehyde, and thimerosal (a mercury derivative).

Aluminum, formaldehyde, and mercury are extremely toxic substances with a long history of documented hazardous effects. Studies confirm again and again that microscopic doses of these substances can lead to cancer, neurological damage, and death. Yet, each of them may be found in childhood vaccines.

In addition to the deliberately planned additives, unanticipated matter may contaminate the shots. For example, during serial passage of the virus through animal cells, animal RNA and DNA -- foreign genetic material -- is transferred from one host to another. Because this biological matter is injected directly into the body, researchers say it can change our genetic makeup.

Undetected animal viruses may jump the species barrier as well. This is exactly what happened during the 1950s and 1960s when millions of people were infected with polio vaccines that were contaminated with the SV-40 virus undetected in the monkey organs used to prepare the vaccines. SV-40 (Simian Virus #40 -- the 40th such virus detected since researchers began looking), is considered a powerful immunosuppressor and trigger for HIV, the name given to the AIDS virus. It is said to cause a clinical condition similar to AIDS, and has been found in brain tumors, leukemia, and other human cancers as well. Researchers consider it to be a cancer-causing virus.

What happens next, once this foul concoction -- live viruses, bacteria, toxic substances, and diseased animal matter -- is created? This witch's brew is forced into the healthy child.

This is scary stuff! If I had known this when I was a child, I would've run the other way! Now I'm poisoned.

The references look solid, as does the information.

It's a Eugenics Policy to make Hitler proud.

Also - There is no doubt vaccines are contaminated. Never mind pathogens from host tissue - the manufacturing process (heat, radiation, etc) creates prions from previously healthy proteins.

FYI - The FDA's Mad Cow Committee considered the prions-in-vaccines issue some years ago, and concluded that there are so many prions, and so many being created all the time, there is no point screening for just one.






clarity



[edit on 1-10-2006 by soficrow]

Originally posted by annestacey
That website has other articles that scare me more than the idea of making women infertile.

There was a lot of interesting information there. The alleged birth control in vaccines for Latin America stood out as a conspiracy type.

So does this -
www.thinktwice.com...
the flu shots. It was very interesting. I have never heard of any of this before and now I will reconsider giving my daughter a flu shot this year.

This won't be a popular thought.
That said, back in the '50's it was bounced around that welfare cheese should be
used as a medium of birth-control. But, not told to the recipients.
I, for one wish it would have been. Then, we would not have 5 generation welfare families living off of my, and, yes...your tax dollars.
Might sound harsh, but it would have worked.

Just my 2 cents,
Lex

Hmm...ok, well, I have two main problems with this thread, both of which pertain to the website www.thinktwice.com

1) The decription of how a vaccine is made, quoted in this thread from www.thinktwice.com, is horrifically wrong and smacks of fearmongering, probably written by someone who has read too much science fiction. If anyone is interested, I would be more than happy to point out the flaws and correct them in another post.

2) Do you not find it a little curious that www.thinktwice.com sells things on their website? I mean, even the "secret government database" is available to buy on CD for $25 USD. Does that not sound a bit like a scam to you people? For a website that is all about "spreading the truth", it seems odd that they would withhold fairly vital information rather than just posting it on their website. If I told you I had the cure for cancer, and want to share it with the world, but could only do so if you sent me $25 USD, would you still send the money?

Oh, wait, that's right, most people on here support that scam artist Trudeau or whatever his name is.

Mariella

Next time a .gov site writes something i dislike, i'll be looking for stuff they sell and if they do....


there are plenty of sources, as anyone with a search engine will attest.

let's try

www.lizmichael.com...

www.vaclib.org...


to add plausibility to our claims, let's take a look the other side of the fence.

from www.epigee.org...

If you’re not a fan of needles, then you may not like the idea of a vaccination against pregnancy or sperm production. Yes, that’s right: vaccines are in the works to help prevent a pregnancy. ..

...
For women, a vaccine that would cause an immune system response to hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) was under development for many years. Also known as the pregnancy hormone, hCG is the hormone produced by a fertilized egg. The vaccine worked by producing an immune system response in a woman’s body when hCG was produced thereby causing a woman’s body to attack both the hCG and the embryo, thus preventing a pregnancy from occurring. However, not only was the vaccine rather controversial, it was also not very affective. As a result, it was never put on the market.

ain't advertising great? can you tell i just loved to post this?

[edit on 9-10-2006 by Long Lance]

I hate to say it...
the birth control part doesn't really bother me much, since Americans are already doing that voluntarily in droves, I dont see the ethical problem really.

the danger by forced vaccinations is bad... and needs to changed...
But the PTB need to be upfront with the people...
tell them "we have to curb our reproduction, or your kids will suffocate from lack of air"
tell them anything to make them think, and understand, that just because you can have kids, doesn't mean you should have a whole litter...

For Mexico, and South America, they really need to have a restriction to 4 kids maximum... and send 2 to another country, the minute they turn 18...

then they could call off these bogus vaccines, that could actually cause harm to kids/people already living...

But yes, overpopulation is something that needs to be addressed before it is too late, rather than have the "logans run option" later...

It is a lesser of two evils... and the elites already have digested these facts, that we peons still cant beleive...

no longer is it a natural right, to have as many kids as you can support!
it is in fact you only have the right to one child per person, and that is only if you agree to die at a decent age.
otherwise, you just aren't being fair to the people that aren't being a burden on the earth...

Simple math:
you have a well that produces 1000 gallons of water per day, and 100 people...(ten gallons per person, per day)
most people only have one opr two kids, and will die someday... so they are zero sum increase over the lifetime.
if someone decides to have 3 or 4 or 5 kids, then who gives up their water?
it quickly becomes a fight to the death between the weakest people in the group, to defend their water supply from the family of 5, that will die without it...

someone is going to die... why? because some selfish twit didn't think ahead, or didn't care... and IMHO, it is he who should die, and give up his water...

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
I hate to say it...
the birth control part doesn't really bother me much, since Americans are already doing that voluntarily in droves, I dont see the ethical problem really.

the danger by forced vaccinations is bad... and needs to changed...
But the PTB need to be upfront with the people...
tell them "we have to curb our reproduction, or your kids will suffocate from lack of air"
tell them anything to make them think, and understand, that just because you can have kids, doesn't mean you should have a whole litter...

For Mexico, and South America, they really need to have a restriction to 4 kids maximum... and send 2 to another country, the minute they turn 18...

then they could call off these bogus vaccines, that could actually cause harm to kids/people already living...

But yes, overpopulation is something that needs to be addressed before it is too late, rather than have the "logans run option" later...

It is a lesser of two evils... and the elites already have digested these facts, that we peons still cant beleive...

no longer is it a natural right, to have as many kids as you can support!
it is in fact you only have the right to one child per person, and that is only if you agree to die at a decent age.
otherwise, you just aren't being fair to the people that aren't being a burden on the earth...

Simple math:
you have a well that produces 1000 gallons of water per day, and 100 people...(ten gallons per person, per day)
most people only have one opr two kids, and will die someday... so they are zero sum increase over the lifetime.
if someone decides to have 3 or 4 or 5 kids, then who gives up their water?
it quickly becomes a fight to the death between the weakest people in the group, to defend their water supply from the family of 5, that will die without it...

someone is going to die... why? because some selfish twit didn't think ahead, or didn't care... and IMHO, it is he who should die, and give up his water...

Ah, but now you are using a Kierkegaardian argument, that is, we must all be bound by some amorphous, sourceless "moral code". Rather, take a look at Nietzsche's view on things like this: we are not bound by some innate moral code or by a god; we are biological beings simply performing biological functions, namely, reproducing. What biological function does having ONE child acheive? It undermines genetic diversity and cohort survival.

Overpopulation is an issue....barring a major catastrophe, the rate at which humans multiply is quickly becoming exponential.....50-100 years....before then, even now, we will see the economic strains.....

That said.......

Only the strong survive.....Vaccinate people against their will......Just hope that they don't find out.....Because a large amount of stupidity can be very strong.......

Originally posted by bsl4doc

Ah, but now you are using a Kierkegaardian argument, that is, we must all be bound by some amorphous, sourceless "moral code". Rather, take a look at Nietzsche's view on things like this: we are not bound by some innate moral code or by a god; we are biological beings simply performing biological functions, namely, reproducing. What biological function does having ONE child acheive? It undermines genetic diversity and cohort survival.

We're not rabbits... we're humans. And part of our responsibility to the Earth and to the future of our society is to procreate responsibly.

Originally posted by annestacey

Originally posted by bsl4doc

Ah, but now you are using a Kierkegaardian argument, that is, we must all be bound by some amorphous, sourceless "moral code". Rather, take a look at Nietzsche's view on things like this: we are not bound by some innate moral code or by a god; we are biological beings simply performing biological functions, namely, reproducing. What biological function does having ONE child acheive? It undermines genetic diversity and cohort survival.

We're not rabbits... we're humans. And part of our responsibility to the Earth and to the future of our society is to procreate responsibly.

That's an awfully self-centered view of life. All ecology is is species preservation. Why do we need to save the pandas, but not the dung beetles? No matter what we do to earth, we will never "destroy" it. We could detonate every nuclear (or as Bush says, nucular) bomb on the planet, and we wouldn't destroy nature, we would just alter it.

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong

But yes, overpopulation is something that needs to be addressed before it is too late, rather than have the "logans run option" later...

It is a lesser of two evils... and the elites already have digested these facts, that we peons still cant beleive...
..
no longer is it a natural right, to have as many kids as you can support!
it is in fact you only have the right to one child per person, and that is only if you agree to die at a decent age.
otherwise, you just aren't being fair to the people that aren't being a burden on the earth...

I respect and understand your opinion on overpopulation and partially agree with you, even though i cannot defend or even understand the underhanded, dangerous idiocy that is apparently commited by a few self-declared 'enlightened' folks who seem control the industry.

the question is wether you believe that clandestinely slipping something into people's food or medical supplies is actually going to have the desired effect, isn't it? paranoia is the inevitable outcome, mistrust is not going to help anyone and please don't forget that we are talking about a crime (strictly discussing unwtting, involunary contraception here).

people should not try to play god, that role model is just too demanding and leaving decisions like these to a few people in the shadows is just asking for trouble.

It's not a reliable source.

Every woman who's ever been on birth control can tell you that one birth control pill (or the equivalent dosage) every two years isn't going to keep you from having babies. Subcutaneous dosages do work, but you know the things are there and they have a limited lifespan (much shorter than the one announced there.)

The chemistry is also wrong. If their proposed scenario (evil HCg in combination with Evil Tetanus shots) was correct, then any woman who ever had a tetanus shot near or around the time of a pregnancy (this could include a lot of military wives -- when you move, you get vaccinations) would end up sterile.

That's a lot of people who SHOULD be sterile or not having more children, who have (contrary to that site) went on to have other children.

Birth rates DO and HAVE declined -- the key is it happens only in areas where women are educated and have an opportunity to enter the work force on a relatively equal footing with men.

Theres this poster I have on my external, it shows whats in the vaccines, it made me punch myself in the face!!!! Now I have mercury in my blood and other bad things of the sort.

Originally posted by Byrd

Every woman who's ever been on birth control can tell you that one birth control pill (or the equivalent dosage) every two years isn't going to keep you from having babies. Subcutaneous dosages do work, but you know the things are there and they have a limited lifespan (much shorter than the one announced there.)
..
If their proposed scenario (evil HCg in combination with Evil Tetanus shots) was correct, then any woman who ever had a tetanus shot near or around the time of a pregnancy (this could include a lot of military wives -- when you move, you get vaccinations) would end up sterile.

birth control by hormone supplementation (conventionalmethod) does not compare, this vaccine would provoke an immunoresponse, something else entirely.

why would they lace everything with hcg? afaics, it's an advertised techique, see link above, ther are tons of webpages on the subject

www.findarticles.com...

www.fwhc.org...

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

wrt the last link, i'd really like to know if the notion that hcg has been found is contested or not? if it isn't i'd really love to know how to explain contamination with something that would be quite hard to obtain.

Originally posted by bsl4doc
That's an awfully self-centered view of life. All ecology is is species preservation.

That's true...But if we don't put some kind of voluntary limits on our reproduction, Mother Nature will eventually weed us out anyway. But before that happens, it's quite likely that, between our technologies affecting the environment & combine that with rampant over-population, the ecological strain may change planet to the point where no humans would survive.

The big problem with voluntary limits is that too few are willing to volunteer; Probably due to the career-freedoms that most women in the world lack (as Byrd pointed out), there's still too many women in the world who have nothing better to do than continue breeding. Thus the overpopulation problem compounds, unless other measures are taken.

That's quite probably the viewpoint that the NWO would adopt in order to bring population under control. I can understand that kind of viewpoint; But that doesn't mean that I could agree with such methods. I would prefer a program of education on the matter, rather than forcing unwilling/unknowing measures.

The problem with "illuminati" styled reasoning & goals is that they try to espouse in the "enoblement of mankind, where all are illuminated"...Such a crock of bull! Their methods put the lie to such high-sounding ideals! If they were truly "illuminated" & want all of humanity to be enlightened, then they should teach the truth instead of power-playing with themselves (

if people do not impose limits upon themselves, isolation therapy would do wonders, if they don't have the means to, it won't happen, simple.


btw, the problem is not women who are bored, rather women who are powerless, i think the illuminated game is very much about keeping people in the dark and weak, so i think the guys who love destructive and unjust solutions conceived the very problems they're alledgedly trying to handle.


PS: the problem is that nonsense dies hard, look at eugenics programs around the world in the 1930s (not just nazi germany!) a few people blind with faith in their infallibility started an agenda which culminated in mass extermination. Unsurprisingly, responsibility was nowhere to be found, but you can bet the chair you're currently sitting on, that the medically minded people who helped construct the whole racial superiority BS were not taken out, but simply kept their heads low.

with the advent of genetic engineering, the spectre of eugenics is again out of the bag, because few know squat about genetics (i'm no exception, just for the record) and are therefore easily shocked and awed by news of genetic determinism (the prerequisite for eugenics). who cares that there are f-ex. more neurons than genes and that only 2% of our genetic code has been interpreted? talking about simple, agressive and violent solutions to problems that have yet to be thought of is much more exciting to some, just look at global politics!

which brings me to a good analogy: like eugenics, World Government is a turkey that keeps coming back, a frightening number of people seems to *_think_* that it's

• inevitable
  
• necessary
  
• logical (huh?`)
  
• and a good thing
  

strangely, EU and NAFTA, the UN and probably the CIS are universally loathed, yet an even bigger load of unaccountable bureaucrats will solve all of our problems if something fails, try more of the same, d'uh.

thinking about it, it's no real surprise when people who favor world government also embrace forceful eugenics, after all both require the same set of beliefs. err sry for OT...