Edition 1.2 References to add
Complex challenges mean mandatory COVID-19 vaccine unlikely: experts
The Canadian Press, Laura Osman – April 29, 2020
While the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars to develop and test potential vaccines for COVID-19, experts say mandatory vaccination is unlikely given the difficult practical and ethical problems . . . .
Recent poll by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies reported that 60 percent believe a vaccine should be required.
To me, this number is better than I expected, considering the level of pro-vaccine propaganda over the years.
Now is the time to share information quickly and try to reduce this 60%.
There are no truly mandatory vaccines in Canada. While provinces like Ontario and New Brunswick require children to be vaccinated in order to attend school, there are exemptions for medical and ideological reasons.
Unfortunately, it mentions how they have forced medical workers to be immunized–so the assumption is that whatever they were immunized with actually works, doesn’t cause harm, and doesn’t spread anything harmful to patients. I think they have scaled that up in recent years. I would like to understand the history of how they have coerced medical workers. It should always be a matter of choice regardless of a person’s career–because everyone has the same fundamental rights and freedoms.
A claim for a product is just a claim as far as I can see. And the manufacturer and whichever employer is imposing these mythical potions should be required to prove every claim about them FIRST. Propaganda is just the use of selected, distorted, one-sided information as in product advertising. Human beings need to think freely in order to gather information about all sides of an issue. Otherwise we’re just farm animals.
Then the article includes a question by a professor about how they can “penalize” or create an “incentive” if vaccines are made mandatory.
. . . “policy-makers down a rabbit hole” . . .
It’s perplexing for them because we are supposed to have rights and freedoms, and they’re not yet used to living in a scientific dictatorship. It must be perplexing, all the things they can do now–and how they can sell tyranny to the majority using fear and emotional tactics. They start to wonder about how all sorts of illegal and unethical impositions can be pushed forward in a palatable way that doesn’t offend sensibilities.
Supposedly we’ve had a free country up until now. Nevertheless, authorities have attempted to push vaccines on the population for a long time. Some people have resisted, sometimes many. Many people have suffered the consequences of not resisting mandatory schooling efforts, even past eugenics sterilization policies, immunization policies, modifications to food, and many other types of government-led policies and corporate-created products over the long years that the majority have assumed good intentions by those in power.
Then it mentions how Australia tried to “convince” parents, by withholding the child tax credit. But I believe that is actually coercion. And it says the low income parents got hit the hardest–obviously.
Ethically speaking, the government would have to make sure not to unduly penalize people . . .
They “would” have to do that because many of the “herd” would object–or figure out what they’re living under.
Good news, some hope in a sense–we should make the most of it:
Policy-makers also have to worry about a backlash, said Ubaka Ogbogu, an associate professor with the University of Alberta . . . .“The reason why we should probably not raise the question of mandatory vaccination in relation to COVID-19 is because it’s deeply controversial,” Ogbogu said.
So, let’s keep it that way.
There is usually vehement opposition to mandatory vaccination, . . . groups who worry about the safety of vaccines and government infringement on their liberties.
I know this comes up since people think they are going to transmit something and die so easily–because they have been lied to systematically–when we talk about “liberties” it sounds like an abstraction to some but it directly relates to being free TO SURVIVE without being coerced and forced into doing things that are objectionable or even harmful. Someone else claims or assumes–often just based on “authority”–that something is “not harmful” but rights and freedoms are a safeguard so that we don’t have to rely on “authority.” By the way, I would say that people make unwarranted assumptions about governments regulating and banning food or other products that are harmful, so they make constant assumptions that everything they eat or buy is perfectly healthy. That’s not how life works at all. If you didn’t challenge something yourself, why do you assume anything is OK at all?
Notice the wording and how they strategize about how they can find a way around all this to impose this regime on us anyway. They don’t want to antagonize people prematurely.
And it mentions a “rapidly developed vaccine”. Any kind of experimental treatment or drug must be based on INFORMED CONSENT according to the Nuremberg Code. I will post that . That is part of the argument. There is also the matter of natural rights and freedoms, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, accepted medical ethics, and the Canadian Criminal Code also–there’s a simple point or two in that document .
Then he says that “we” don’t want to have to fight “over whether it should be mandatory.”
They expect Canadians to want this fictional, future vaccine really badly because of the current new COVID-19 hyped reality we’re living in, so he says we’re more worried about running out of the supply.
By the way, it already is coercion, because the Prime Minister is threatening us, saying that normal life won’t return until there is a vaccine [link in that post].
So we’re already in a forced situation, where we are told to stay in our homes while the economy falls apart.
As people get sicker and die (which people do constantly in normal times) from untreated illnesses as they are stuck at home, and get weaker and weaker from lack of resources, sure, they’re probably going to rush for the vaccine–they won’t understand or know what it is. But that isn’t coercion?
I notice that these experts, government officials and media people refer to “vaccines,” assuming that people have an agreed understanding of what that means–as if most of them have any idea of what functions and ingredients are tested by those working on them. Everyone assumes it is a “vaccine” as if they understand the meaning of that word. There is no vaccine yet, but they are already promoting it as a good thing.
Ultimately, I’ll decide if I think it is a good thing or not for myself. And I’ll insist that we should all have access to all information and all sides of the story.
Here’s another article and another point of concern:
Many new vaccines will be made possible with the development of a new type of vaccine called DNA vaccines. This type of vaccine actually injects the DNA needed to make a specific portion of the pathogen into the vaccine recipient. The potential immunity that could be gained from a DNA vaccine would be effective and last for a long time. . . .
As if anyone is going to understand or be certain about what they’re actually putting in to your body and what it does. And they claim it is “effective” and lasts for a long time–whatever it is.
Another question about the definition of “vaccine” which people think is so clear-cut:
In this article there are all sorts of claims even about existing vaccines and projects to make new ones–a lot of failures so far despite all the years of experimentation (and victims)– but they’re always “getting closer”–getting closer to what? To doing whatever they want to us?!
And please note, after all these years, the article says that an HIV/AIDS vaccine wasn’t developed until 2017–despite all the research–and whatever it is not available to the public yet. So think about that! What’s the explanation for that if vaccines are such a valid, sensible concept?! Once you start to look for explanations, what do you think you’re going to find? How many decades was that? And now they’re promising something for COVID-19.
By the way, speaking of supposed cancer vaccines, the number one cause of death–every year–in Canada–for all ages–is cancer–225/day in Canada as per the 2019 total. When should we congratulate our public health regime? There is some kind of imbalances in priority. But people will fall for that hope–just because someone strung some words together, promising to create a vaccine for COVID-19 or a vaccine for cancer–having a record of damaged victims for the “cancer” vaccine they have–which is suppressed by the mainstream media. And this censorship is going to get worse as I explained in my post on Event 201–if people go along with it.
Read the article–disease after disease–they’re not there yet. Is it just an empty belief system they’re propping up? Is there proof for any claim? Case by case, let’s be fair, but can we assume these products are really what they claim to be?
But, getting to the main point, this article refers to projects to develop heroin/opioid addiction vaccines! How on earth is a “vaccine” to supposedly prevent opioid addiction the same sort of thing as a regular vaccine?
“A vaccine would work by destroying heroin that’s injected into the body before it gets a chance to get to the brain and give a patients a high” according to Opiant CEO Roger Crystal.
What would that be? That kind of substance running around in your body sounds very BUSY. It’s packaged with an amazing story and promise, but that’s not going into my body unless it’s forcibly injected.
And below is another example, a post I compiled on a Canadian Alzheimer’s “vaccine” project and other topics. Whatever it would be, it would get right in there somehow and do whatever it needs to do to your brain or blood or whatever to “prevent Alzheimer’s”. I don’t know what happened to that project, but there is the idea. What else could it do by mistake? How much experimentation would that take? People put a lot of trust in “science” because they assume that everyone has the same value system of concern for others and don’t realize that there is a value system that wants to control others.
I will have to post something on Ghost in the Machine by Arthur Koestler .
Here is some important and relevant information about the shocking history of vaccine damage by the Gates Foundation everyone should read about. So much for vaccine trials all over the world! Read the other side of the story for a change while information is still available:
Just a couple of general points. If Canadians allow all this to proceed, one of the predictions I would make at this point is that the COVID-19 “testing” regime, as it already affects workplaces for those working, will lead to programs or discussion regarding mating and dating in Canada–especially when it comes to possible restrictions on the number of children. I think that new relationships are already being affected heavily by the lockdown. I think that this sort of policy will follow naturally from the underlying agenda held by globalists. I have a lot of information collected in a series called “Freedom of Conscience vs. Population Control”. Even ten years ago, the Canadian media insisted on pushing limits on the number of children.
It’s important to think about the words “mandatory” and “coercion”. Three is so much pressure going towards population control from the top that many actions are carried out illegally and in obvious violation of internationally accepted principles.
And people should bear that in mind as they get familiar with this new system–but Canadians don’t seem to realize what it is yet–or maybe they do and they’re afraid to say anything. Others are sill in denial because of the powerful, coordinated brainwashing. They still believe in the myths built up about the virus.
Coercive sterilization IS A REALITY – regardless of how illegal it is – it keeps coming:
And I have plenty of posts illustrating what coercion involves when it comes to women being sterilized in various incidents all over the world over the years. See https://canadianliberty.com/?s=sterilization. Coercion in those cases means they are offered a contraceptive injection that has the “side effect” of sterilizing them (see post above), or they are given a hysterectomy after having their appendix removed, or pushed into having a tubal ligation after they have had a baby . And apparently this involves “incentives”–presumably illegal–to the medical workers. I think it’s the darker end of the “sustainable development” agenda which uses terms like “reproductive rights” to cover the underlying policy. Do you think we could end up getting treated like these “third world” countries?
Another post on human fertility control: