posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:07 PM
Something I have been mulling over for a while is that with the laws in place today about spreading diseases and the harsh penalties involved with
such, why have we got 'compulsory' vaccination, which beyond the government veiwpoint, can be looked upon as 'Biological Terrorism'.
Lets define what this is first:
According to the US-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
A bioterrorism attack is the deliberate release of viruses, bacteria, or other germs (agents) used to cause illness or death in people,
animals, or plants. These agents are typically found in nature, but it is possible that they could be changed to increase their ability to cause
disease, make them resistant to current medicines, or to increase their ability to be spread into the environment. Biological agents can be spread
through the air, through water, or in food. Terrorists may use biological agents because they can be extremely difficult to detect and do not cause
illness for several hours to several days.
Some bioterrorism agents, like the smallpox virus, can be spread from person to person and some, like anthrax, cannot.
On many occasions, I have personally contracted a "New" strain of the flu from somebody who has just received the 'latest' version of the flu
shot. This means that that particular strain of the virus is not currently prevalent in the community because if it was, there would be no need for a
'vaccination' against it, as people's immune systems would be already programmed to combat it.
These points can be shown:
1. This strain of the flu (the one released in the vaccine), did not exist previously in the environment.
2. This particular strain of the flu can be shown to be most virulent and contagious, thereby proving that it has been 'altered' by human
3. The period of sickness and pain/discomfort experienced can be shown to 'greater' each time and results in losses to the greater community, both
in time and monetary ways.
Using the above, I would like to ask why, if the laws exist against 'deliberately' spreading of contagions and diseases, the person's involved in
these actions (the spreading of this contagion) are not prosecuted to the full extent of the law?
In a country that congratulates itself on freedom and law, how is this possible?
Give me your ideas.
[edit on 6/12/09 by starwarp2000]