Legal council tells concerned caller that American citizens must accept enforced shot in event of mass swine flu vaccination program.
A member of the public who was concerned about a mandatory mass vaccination program in light of the swine flu pandemic called the Arkansas State
Health Department for advice only to be told that mandatory vaccines were constitutional and could be enforced at gunpoint by the government if
The editor of the popular blog “Pissed Off Former Democrat” phoned the legal council at the Arkansas State Health Department to seek advice about
obtaining waiver forms for a future mass swine flu vaccination program.
One of his main concerns centered around the fact that the company chosen to mass produce the swine flu vaccine, Baxter International, were recently
caught in a scandal after it emerged they had sent out vaccines contaminated with the H5N1 avian flu virus to 18 countries from their Austrian branch.
It was only by providence that the contamination was found after the batch was first tested on ferrets in the Czech Republic, before being shipped out
for injection into humans. The ferrets all died and the shocking discovery was made.
Some Czech newspapers speculated at the time that Baxter was embroiled in a conspiracy to provoke a pandemic from which it would reap billions in
profits from producing the vaccine to counter a bird flu outbreak.
As we have previously covered, the last time the government ordered a mass vaccination drive in response to a swine flu outbreak, the program had to
be stopped short after the shots caused over 500 cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a severe paralyzing nerve disease. 30 people died as a direct
result of the vaccinations.
During the phone conversation, the legal council discusses the potential of a future mandatory swine flu vaccination program and states, “That’s
constitutional, there’s no doubt about it….mandatory vaccinations are legal under the Supreme Court….absolutely.”
The caller responds, “I’m an American and I have a legal right to make my own decision whether or not someone sticks a needle in me,” to which
the legal council responds, “That’s not true….no.”
“As a lawyer you believe that I don’t have the right to deny a vaccination,” asks the caller,” to which the legal council responds,
“Absolutely….I don’t know why you have a problem with that….mandatory vaccines are constitutional,” adding that it doesn’t matter about
personal or religious objections.
The caller then asks how the mandatory vaccine would be enforced by law, “for example somebody sticking a gun in my face,” to which the legal
council responds, “you could be held liable.”
The legal council at the Arkansas State Health Department cites the 1905 Supreme Court case of Jacobson v Massachusetts to argue that governments can
force citizens to take vaccines.
Less than 50 years before, in Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court also ruled that black people were slaves - property of their slaveowners with
no inherent rights whatsoever.
22 years after Jacobson v Mass., in Buck v Bell, the Supreme Court also ruled that people designated “feeble-minded” by the government could be
The fact that the Supreme Court made a ruling over 100 hundred years ago saying the government could inject people by force doesn’t make it morally
or constitutionally justifiable.
To stick needles in people at gunpoint by government decree is blatantly unconstitutional under any reasonable definition of basic human rights or the
freedoms enumerated by the founders in the constitution itself.
American Indians were rounded up and sent to death camps under legal orders, but that didn’t make it right or justifiable.
Hitler’s mistreatment of Jews, Gypsies, political dissidents, homosexuals and others who resisted government policies imposed during times of
“emergency” in Nazi Germany was all perpetrated behind a thin veil of legality, but that didn’t make it right