Not meaning to report on something which hasn’t happened to us yet, but I for one, would love for the New Mexico legislature to adopt the same stance as Massachusetts, which has passed the new Pandemic Response Bill in their state Senate and will now be considering this in their state House.
Here’s the cool part – it suspends all constitutional rights of MA citizens and would require those suspected of being ill, to submit to a variety of official manhandling.
Yep. Catch the flu in Massachusetts, and you will have bought a one-way ticket to something between Orwell’s 1984 or maybe in a worst-case scenario, London’s “The Scarlet Plague or King’s “The Stand.”
But most likely, we’ll avoid the near-total destruction of humanity and all the goodies that go along with a “King-like” ending, and will instead just be given the opportunity to have government dictate not only what we do in our businesses, or what we do in our homes, but also what we have in our bodies – in this case, an injection or series of injections - whether you agree to it or not.
Please bring this whole thing to the Southwest. Because, I believe when you do, you’ll understand the meaning of the word “resistance.”
The new MA bill would violate the rights in an amazingly flagrant way. From illegal search and seizure (4th Amendment violations in the name of decontamination), to illegal arrest (14th Amendement violation), Involuntary Transportation (kidnapping), and Forced Quarantine (illegal imprisonment), this legislation is a lawyer’s dream.
Citizens would be also subjected to “decontamination” (and arrest if they refused), forced isolation and quarantine, destruction of property, and interrogation. I wonder if they are going to add enhanced interrogation to this legislation. Water-boarding anyone?
There is no recourse for MA citizens if this passes. But the situation is really much worse.
In 2006, former President George Bush signed the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. The act allows the HHS to declare any infectious disease a “national emergency” and subsequently force the mandatory vaccination of the whole population. Mandatory vaccination in the “national emergency” case, means that refusal may label you as a “threat.” This could cause all the wonderful items being faced by MA citizens with their shiny, new House bill.
All involved in the enforcement of the program will be granted immunity by the Federal government for any legal claims arising from the enforcement of the Act or the use of vaccine.
Remember that the country’s centennial celebrations in 1976, were marred by a swine-flu scare in which Pvt. David Lewis of Ashley Falls, MA, was killed by the flu in 24 hours. Only Lewis died of the flu, but hundreds died of the inoculation given to the public during the $135 million program put together in President Gerald Ford’s time in the White House. By October 1, 1976, the serums were ready and by December 16 of that year, the program had been suspended, but 40 million people had been inoculated for a flu, which itself, only killed one person.
But today’s swine flu is a little different. Globally, swine flu deaths have now passed 1100 since it emerged in Mexico in April and there have been more than 10,000 cases worldwide. 556 of those deaths and nearly 9,000 hospitalizations have been in the U.S. CDC officials have already begun to circulate the news that it is possible, albeit not likely, that H1N1 could kill in the range of 90,000 Americans this winter and hospitalize 1.8 million people.
So what’s the truth?
Hubba, hubba, hubba – who do you trust?
Always follow the money. If you do that in this case, you end up at the doorsteps of the big pharmaceutical companies who have been saddled with the task of producing enough vaccine for the population. These are Sanofi Pasteur, Novartis, AstraZeneca, CSL and MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline. Their motivation is clear.
It is everyone else’s motivations that should be suspect. Even if you try to look at the statistics, it is impossible to get a clear picture. Would the vaccination be a good thing – or won’t it? Would voluntary vaccination cover enough of the population, or won’t it?
Much of the U.S. Statistical Abstract is gathered from data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau – and lately, that group is being connected more and more with the community organization ACORN. It seems unlikely that they will be welcome on the doorsteps of many people in America. But if we look at 2006 figures, it is possible to see an overall picture showing that between 78 and 98 percent of people in the U.S. get other types of vaccinations voluntarily. But is that going to be enough for H1N1, and will it be ready in time?
According to the CDC, “the 2009 H1N1 vaccine is expected to be available in the fall. More specific dates cannot be provided at this time as vaccine availability depends on several factors including manufacturing time and time needed to conduct clinical trials.”
In July, officials said that 120 million doses of the vaccine would be ready in October, but the revised production schedule has this hitting the streets with 45 million doses in October and another 20 million in the clinics each month following.
Also according to the CDC, those vaccinated in 1976 will not likely be protected and will need the new vaccination. The highest statistics for doctor’s visits for flu related symptoms were recorded in February of last year and it is expected that the H1N1 flu may follow the same course. Most H1N1 viruses identified remain susceptible to antiviral drugs, which can reduce the intensity of the symptoms.
Many people will turn out willingly for the chance to be immunized, but many also will not. I have, since childhood, avoided immunizations, except for those required by the military during my time in the Service. Would I make a different voluntary decision if offered this vaccine? I don’t know yet.
What I do know, however, is that I would definitely resist anything, which is made compulsory – and I believe many other people would resist this kind of government heavy-handedness, regardless of the alleged benefits. Ask yourself if it’s really all that smart to bring a syringe to a gunfight?
We are Americans. We don’t like to be told what to do by stuffed shirts. We don’t generally back-down. We fight and we meet such actions head-on.
What makes anyone in government think this situation is any different?
******
To see the U.S. CDC flu map, go here:
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/regions2008-2009/hhssenusmap.htm
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment