Massachusetts Senate pass bill 2028: Quarantine or $1000 a day fine for refusing the vaccine

page: 13
96
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
If this happens in California then they better haul my ass off to jail!
I wouldn't be too surprised if they do try to pull it off here as well.




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
You couldnt catch me in Mas. any day of the season.

And if it goes federal, thats fine too! I'll be long gone by then.




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Do some research and you'll see that every notation and press release of this bill, uses the word "individual", as in "any individual unable or unwilling to participate in the vaccination".
What is the legal definition of 'individual'?

If you ask a lawmaker, they will say that an individual includes a person.
Well, since the legal maxim of "inclusion of one is exclusion of all others", then only 'persons' are legally obliged to follow the vaccination bills, no?

Wait, you think you're a person? NUH UH! In legal terms, a person includes a corporation.
What did I just say about inclusion? Yes, that's correct, only CORPORATIONS are liable for prosecution for refusing the vaccine.

But, you say they're going to storm everyone's houses and have mass arrests and quarantines to ensure everybody is vaccinated? Mate, if it gets to that stage, you should get the [frobody] out of your country, as you'd no longer be living in a free america, but would now be living in Nazi Germany. You can fly the sovereignty flag all you want, but if history is anything to go by, the American government won't give a [shizwaggle] about your sovereignty.

[edit on 27/8/2009 by nrky]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by marg6043
 


It's classic diversionary tactics.

This is NOT a conspiracy, this IS reality now.

People have been talking of this kind of scenario for a long time, and the modus operandi so far, hasn't missed a step with the consensus.

Don't the students get involved with exposing and protesting shady government practices anymore? They have the right to protest in Mass i assume? Or has that been taken away too?


The students stopped protesting because the new face of the New World Order is black. They have been trained from birth to not protest against a black person because that would make them appear to be racist to other people their age.

I would go one step further and surmise that this is the real reason that BO was given the Presidency... To eliminate the protests from the left.

The mainstream and the right they never had to worry about, the current thing they never expected, it was the radical left they needed to silence.

The left, and students, who are primarily left, were on the edge of a revolution before the last election. If any white person were given the Presidency we would already have had a revolution, but by taking the same NWO and putting a black face on it - the youth wouldn't dare to even protest because they wouldn't want to be called a racist. A very clever move.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by warrenb
 


Maybe (just maybe) this is to limit an otherwise rampant pandemic?
If you're walking around with swine flu (or anything else for that matter), you're not just hurting yourself.
You're potentially hurting anyone you come in contact with.
And that, believe it or not, SHOULD be illegal.

Sure, it could also be a perfectly orchestrated government conspiracy, in which the sheer amount of people who would have to know and yet say nothing would require nothing less.
Or, it could simply be a bill which could potentially save millions of lives.

Simply stating that it ABSOLUTELY IS the first, without evidence of such, is (in my opinion at least) narrow minded.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by warrenb
really makes you wonder what the heck is in that shot


Maybe a vaccination...
You should at least consider the possibility...



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


There is no proof that this swine flu is any more a pandemic then regular flu. about as many will get it and about as many will die. The regular flu isn't a forced vaccination though...why this one.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by warrenb
 


Maybe (just maybe) this is to limit an otherwise rampant pandemic?
If you're walking around with swine flu (or anything else for that matter), you're not just hurting yourself.
You're potentially hurting anyone you come in contact with.
And that, believe it or not, SHOULD be illegal.

Sure, it could also be a perfectly orchestrated government conspiracy, in which the sheer amount of people who would have to know and yet say nothing would require nothing less.
Or, it could simply be a bill which could potentially save millions of lives.

Simply stating that it ABSOLUTELY IS the first, without evidence of such, is (in my opinion at least) narrow minded.


How could a pandemic get here if they really did not want it? They could easily stop all border entries and extraterritorial aircraft. Ships could be quarantined etc.

I simply do not believe that David Rockefeller and friends care so much for me that they will move Heaven and Earth to make sure I get a flu shot.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by amazing
There is no proof that this swine flu is any more a pandemic then regular flu. about as many will get it and about as many will die. The regular flu isn't a forced vaccination though...why this one.


If it doesn't become that serious, then we won't have to worry about this bill at all, will we?
Then again, if it does, I don't like the idea of people endangering others and making the problem worse by refusing to be treated.
Myself - I don't know if the vaccine has an 'evil' purpose or not.
Unlike many on this thread, I don't PRETEND to know.

But it really would be ironic and a bit sad if all the paranoid anti-governmentalists decided not to get the vaccine at their own (and others) peril.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by DieterDengler
How could a pandemic get here if they really did not want it? They could easily stop all border entries and extraterritorial aircraft. Ships could be quarantined etc.


In case you haven't noticed, our government doesn't move that fast.



Originally posted by DieterDengler
I simply do not believe that David Rockefeller and friends care so much for me that they will move Heaven and Earth to make sure I get a flu shot.


Maybe it's not about you.
Maybe it's about the bigger picture.

I doubt these people would WANT to live in a country full of the dead and dying.
Think about it.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


Even if there is a risk of it becoming a pandemic... tell me again why I would allow someone to inject me with a vaccine containing Thimerosal (Mercury) and Squalene?

I'll take my chances not getting vaccinated, it's far less dangerous than what's in the vaccine. Maybe I'll get swine flu, but the chance that it will be fatal is so low that it doesn't concern me.

Edit: Also, do you realize that by the time they have fully developed the vaccine and deployed it the virus will have likely slightly mutated, therefore rendering the vaccine utterly useless. This happens every time they try to make a flu vaccine, as in 1918 and 1976. The vaccine ends up doing basically nothing in preventing the virus and the vaccine ITSELF ends up killing more people than the flu does.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by JipStix]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by JipStix
Even if there is a risk of it becoming a pandemic... tell me again why I would allow someone to inject me with a vaccine containing Thimerosal (Mercury) and Squalene?


Lesser of two evils, perhaps?


Originally posted by JipStix
I'll take my chances not getting vaccinated, it's far less dangerous than what's in the vaccine. Maybe I'll get swine flu, but the chance that it will be fatal is so low that it doesn't concern me.


Maybe.
Then again, maybe it would mutate until it does concern you.
Either way, this bill isn't specifically for swine flu is it?

All I'm saying is, it's unwise to simply hold the position "My government wants to screw me up the buttocks" without proof that such is the case.

WHAT IF there IS a deadly pandemic somewhere down the road.
WHAT IF it IS in our best interest to take a vaccine if such is the case?

What I see when I read this thread is paranoia without evidence.

Personally, I'm not going to say "I will take the vaccine" or "I won't take the vaccine" until I know what the situation is (if that day ever comes).
And in such a situation, the people who have already made up their minds that they absolutely won't take any vaccine, may be among the first to die.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Oh certainly. I was specifically referring to this swine flu situation. I believe it to be wholly overblown and a fine example of government fear-mongering.

Certainly, if a deadlier virus came down the pipe, I would consider changing my stance on vaccination. You have to weigh the risk of vaccination against the risk of getting infected. For this particular strain of flu, I am not the least bit concerned and will not be vaccinated.

I would also like to add that a lot of the paranoia is justified, as the producer of several flu vaccines, Baxter, has made many serious mistakes as of late. They almost caused an outbreak of avian bird flu by 'accidentally' shipping the live virus to a distributor. Luckily, the distributor noticed before the samples were disbursed.

So people are certainly justified in being skeptical of any vaccines, and should certainly ask many questions before even considering an injection.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by JipStix]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by JipStix
 


You may be right.
I'm just tired of people completely ignoring the possibility that things may in fact be what they appear to be on the surface.
To simply accept a vaccine is foolish.
But to simply deny it is foolish as well.
We don't even know what potential threat we could be dealing with, yet many in this thread have said there's no way in Hell they would take a vaccine.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
It is not a matter of you, and what you think.

This is a matter of each sovereign individual having the right over thier own body, and the rights granted to U.S. citizens under the constitution!

No one including but not limited to a doctor or a nurse, a county agency or a govenment agecny, has the right to stick a needle in me and inject poison into my body against my will.

You dont have a problem with it...take the vaccine.

I have an objection, and I will not be vaccinated.


Ok first of all, I am not for the vaccine at all.

Second, we have the right over our own bodies yes, but if we are a danger to our self or others then the law steps in. That is how it is now. I dont see how this is any different. If you were ill with smallpox did you think they would not quarantine you? For the safety of others I would want them to quarantine me.

As for them sticking a needle in you and injecting something against your will, only if it was somthing that would chill you out if you were in the middle of a rampage that would put you or others in danger......but that is how it is now too.

They are not going to be sending thugs to break down your door and shoot you up with a vaccine. THAT IS INSANE!!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I don't necessarily want to get off topic so I will make this brief:

Being from Massachusetts, I have to say I'm pretty resentful of everyone making snide and uncalled for remarks about my home state. People and government are the same everywhere you go, so don't think you have some kind of regional superiority. It's counterproductive.


On the topic at hand:

I haven't read every post in this thread yet so this may have already been noticed, but the first paragraphs in bill 2028 state:




SECTION 1. Chapter 17 of the General Laws is 1 hereby amended by striking out 2 section 2A, as appearing in the 2006 Official Edition, and inserting in place thereof the 3 following section:
Section 2A. (a) Upon declaration by the governor that an emergency exists which is detrimental 5 to the public health or upon declaration of a state of emergency under chapter 639 of the acts of 6 1950, as amended, the commissioner may, during such period of emergency, take such action 7 and incur such liabilities as he or she may consider necessary to assure the maintenance of 8 public health and the prevention of disease. The commissioner may establish procedures to be 9 followed during such emergency to ensure the continuation of essential public health services 10 and the enforcement of the same.


www.mass.gov...

The key phrase I saw immediately, and also think is much more frightening, is "or upon declaration of a state of emergency under chapter 639 of the acts of 1950." Or a state of emergency, eh? What's Chapter 639 of the Acts of 1950?

The first paragraph of Chapter 639 of the Massachusetts Acts of 1950 states:




The Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is authorized under state lawchapter 639 of the Acts of 1950, as amended, to declare a Gubernatorial State of Emergency upon the occurrence of a natural or man-made disaster (see attached sample Executive Orders). Thise law gives the Governor broad authorities to implement emergency measures to ensure the safety and health of the residents of the Commonwealth, take appropriate steps to mobilize state assets and conduct other emergency business for the protection of the Commonwealth.


And with just a few words, almost any imaginable event can be declared a state of emergency, and the quarantine/isolation sections of bill 2028 become a whole lot more terrifying. A vaccine doesn't seem so scary anymore. I'm sure much of the MA Senate had great intentions in terms of pandemic prevention, but the sad truth of government is that not every word of every bill being passed is read. Just skimmed.

*EDIT* I was trying to find a linkable version as a source for Chapter 639 but couldn't find one that worked. Google has a downloadable .doc if you just search 'Massachusetts acts of 1950 chapter 639'

[edit on 27-8-2009 by Sacreligion]

[edit on 27-8-2009 by Sacreligion]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Can't we just elect to take them all out? Impeach them all! They are bloodsuckers - trying to suck all of the blood out of the entire USA. They are grabbing every $ and taking it for themselves.

Does that not bother anyone else but me? We need new people in charge - people who actually work for US and represent OUR desires - not THEIR greedy agendas - just people to do what WE as Americans want. And need.

When did Hitler and Stalin come back to life and take over America? I didn't catch the news-flash. Where was I? My bad.








posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by JipStix
Oh certainly. I was specifically referring to this swine flu situation. I believe it to be wholly overblown and a fine example of government fear-mongering.

Certainly, if a deadlier virus came down the pipe, I would consider changing my stance on vaccination. You have to weigh the risk of vaccination against the risk of getting infected. For this particular strain of flu, I am not the least bit concerned and will not be vaccinated.

I would also like to add that a lot of the paranoia is justified, as the producer of several flu vaccines, Baxter, has made many serious mistakes as of late. They almost caused an outbreak of avian bird flu by 'accidentally' shipping the live virus to a distributor. Luckily, the distributor noticed before the samples were disbursed.

So people are certainly justified in being skeptical of any vaccines, and should certainly ask many questions before even considering an injection.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by JipStix] [/qu
Wouldn't it be wonderful - if they knew wtf they were doing? Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could trust our GOVERNMENT? Remember? Like we used to? Who are we? Where are we? Mars?



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   
Don't know why you guys pasted that last comment onto another post. Maybe I screwed up. Wasn't supposed to be reply to quote. Just saying that I don't think we should have to put up with all the lies and fraud of our Government. We pay them - very, very well - but, apparently, they don't work for us - they work for someone else...WHO?








posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Sacreligion
 


Very good post, you get a star for seeing the bigger picture.


I think this flu pandemic is just an excuse to give them more power. Look we all get the idea that this flu is no more dangerous than others (well at its current state at least) and when the flu season comes and goes what do you think they will say? "Well we got very lucky this time" but MA (and I suspect more states to follow suit) will have 2028 on the books so they can use it when the time is right.

Good luck to all.

It will be interesting to see what comes of this.





top topics
 
96
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join