Rfk drops ball

[Say it aint so]

If you're going to use hyperbole, it's cordwood, not "chord wood".

You should really do some research into those makeshift morgues. Nearly all of them were completely unused. But boy, the image of (almost entirely empty) refrigerated trucks was clearly effective propaganda, because here you are years later still invoking that image.

You've still glossed over the fact that the recommendations were based on what happened in the past century. Theatrics like refrigerated trucks driving in the streets do not change the fact that forcible vaccination and quarantine policies over the past ONE HUNDRED YEARS have CONSISTENTLY ACCELERATED the spread of disease and fomented distrust.

Thanks cord wood, two words.

 

[VirOptimus]

Science denial is tragic.

 

[Say it aint so]

If you're going to use hyperbole, it's cordwood, not "chord wood".

You should really do some research into those makeshift morgues. Nearly all of them were completely unused. But boy, the image of (almost entirely empty) refrigerated trucks was clearly effective propaganda, because here you are years later still invoking that image.

You've still glossed over the fact that the recommendations were based on what happened in the past century. Theatrics like refrigerated trucks driving in the streets do not change the fact that forcible vaccination and quarantine policies over the past ONE HUNDRED YEARS have CONSISTENTLY ACCELERATED the spread of disease and fomented distrust.

And btw, I did read the historical of the 2008 report. It was America's history of targeting immigrants. Hopefully like the last Trump presidency, another epidemic doesn't take place this presidency. Because it wouldn't be a surprise that Trump would do come immigrants what they did early in American history. In light of the 2008 concerns, I don't think you should dismiss their recent concern come covid mandates.

 

[probinson]

Thanks cord wood, two words.

Cordwood is a single word. Yeesh. If you're going to use propaganda, at least spell it right.

Cordwood construction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[probinson]

And btw, I did read the historical of the 2008 report.

The historical what? What 2008 report are you talking about? What I posted was a pandemic preparedness plan that the ACLU published in 2008, and it made it abundantly clear that coercion and forcible measures not only do not help, they make things worse, and they foment distrust.

In light of the 2008 concerns, I don't think you should dismiss their recent concern come covid mandates.

I have no idea what you're trying to say, but you're not saying it well at all.

 

[Say it aint so]

The historical what? What 2008 report are you talking about? What I posted was a pandemic preparedness plan that the ACLU published in 2008, and it made it abundantly clear that coercion and forcible measures not only do not help, they make things worse, and they foment distrust.



I have no idea what you're trying to say, but you're not saying it well at all.

The historical reasons listed in the 2008 report. They list past treatment of immigrants and minorities and forced vaccinations. The concerns in that report never occurred given covid. There was no law enforcement if one did not get vaccinated. There were forced removals of immigrants or by race. And yes, vaccine mandates just like they have in schools and when one joins the military as the ACLU notes has value.

 

[probinson]

The historical reasons listed in the 2008 report. They list past treatment of immigrants and minorities and forced vaccinations. The concerns in that report never occurred given covid. There was no law enforcement if one did not get vaccinated. There were forced removals of immigrants or by race. And yes, vaccine mandates just like they have in schools and when one joins the military as the ACLU notes has value.

I'm not sure why you keep ignoring the obvious question. The pandemic preparedness plan very unambiguously states, "Highly discriminatory and forcible vaccination and quarantine measures adopted in response to outbreaks of the plague and smallpox over the past century have consistently accelerated rather than slowed the spread of disease, while fomenting public distrust and, in some cases, riots." This is an accurate statement. It didn't change because of COVID. Vaccine mandates do indeed foment distrust. Especially when public health lies about the efficacy and risks of the vaccine.

And now, here we are seeing firsthand the results of the foolish and ineffective COVID vaccine mandates. Vaccine uptake is dropping across the board. Because vaccine mandates foment distrust.

 

[Pommer]

Maybe the next pandemic will be better mangled managed?

 

[Say it aint so]

I'm not sure why you keep ignoring the obvious question. The pandemic preparedness plan very unambiguously states, "Highly discriminatory and forcible vaccination and quarantine measures adopted in response to outbreaks of the plague and smallpox over the past century have consistently accelerated rather than slowed the spread of disease, while fomenting public distrust and, in some cases, riots." This is an accurate statement. It didn't change because of COVID. Vaccine mandates do indeed foment distrust. Especially when public health lies about the efficacy and risks of the vaccine.

And now, here we are seeing firsthand the results of the foolish and ineffective COVID vaccine mandates. Vaccine uptake is dropping across the board. Because vaccine mandates foment distrust.

Yes that is an accurate statement. For the historical reasons they listed. Things that DID NOT occur during covid. Their 2008 rational of law enforcement concerns are very clear in their report. Their 2021 statement of vaccine necessity furthering civil liberties is also very clear. Btw, the ACLU was your choice of org to make what ever point you think your making.

 

[probinson]

Their 2021 statement of vaccine necessity furthering civil liberties is also very clear.

No it's not. It's a nonsensical assertion.

Being coerced to be vaccinated with a vaccine that neither prevents infection nor stops disease spread is not in the interest of furthering civil liberties no matter what anyone says. In fact, it's in direct violation of informed consent.

Also your assertion that law enforcement didn't happen during COVID is laughably and demonstrably false. There are video clips of law enforcement assaulting people who wouldn't wear a mask in an open stadium. And who can forget the people being arrested for simply trying to enjoy the beach. There were countless examples of law enforcement intervening as a result of people violating forcible quarantine measures, declining to wear a mask, or daring to attempt to eat at a restaurant without a vaccine card.

COVID was a PRIME example of what happens when law enforcement is abused in a pandemic environment. It's EXACTLY what the ACLU warned against in their 2008 pandemic preparedness plan., until it became politically expedient to change their tune. Your denial won't change what we all know actually happened.

 

[Say it aint so]

No it's not. It's a nonsensical assertion.

Being coerced to be vaccinated with a vaccine that neither prevents infection nor stops disease spread is not in the interest of furthering civil liberties no matter what anyone says.

Also your assertion that law enforcement didn't happen during COVID is laughably and demonstrably false. There are video clips of law enforcement assaulting people who wouldn't wear a mask in an open stadium. And who can forget the people being arrested for simply trying to enjoy the beach. There were countless examples of law enforcement intervening as a result of people violating forcible quarantine measures, declining to wear a mask, or daring to attempt to eat at a restaurant without a vaccine card.

COVID was a PRIME example of what happens when law enforcement is used in a pandemic environment. It's EXACTLY what the ACLU warned against in their 2008 pandemic preparedness plan. Your denial won't change what we all know actually happened.

The rational for the 2008 report was very clear. Someone being denied entry into stadium for not adhering to that stadium's covid policy will get them trespassed. They can leave voluntarily or get the frog marshaled out. Their voluntary choice.

 

[probinson]

The rational for the 2008 report was very clear. Someone being denied entry into stadium for not adhering to that stadium's covid policy will get them trespassed. They can leave voluntarily or get the frog marshaled out. Their voluntary choice.

That's some really crazy spin.

Just like I've been told people weren't "forced" to be vaccinated. Just told they couldn't participate in polite society unless they complied. "Their voluntary choice".

Here's an article with the headline, "Police are arresting and fining people for violating coronavirus distancing orders" if you'd like to see a few more examples.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/us/violating-coronavirus-orders-trnd

From the article:

In Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan said that those who violate the stay-at-home order could face a misdemeanor and be jailed for up to one year or fined $5,000.​

​

In New York City, residents who violate social distancing rules face fines ranging from $250 to $500, according to Mayor Bill de Blasio.​

This is EXACTLY what the 2008 ACLU Pandemic Preparedness Plan (which was subtitled "The need for a public health - not a law enforcement/national security - approach.") was warning against.

And, just like the lessons from history stated in the 2008 plan, COVID vaccine mandates did not slow the spread of the disease, and those mandates did an immense amount of damage by fomenting distrust in ALL vaccines. It was all very predictable to anyone who would heed those lessons from history.

 

[Say it aint so]

That's some really crazy spin.

Just like I've been told people weren't "forced" to be vaccinated. Just told they couldn't participate in polite society unless they complied. "Their voluntary choice".

Here's an article with the headline, "Police are arresting and fining people for violating coronavirus distancing orders" if you'd like to see a few more examples.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/us/violating-coronavirus-orders-trnd

From the article:

In Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan said that those who violate the stay-at-home order could face a misdemeanor and be jailed for up to one year or fined $5,000.​

​

In New York City, residents who violate social distancing rules face fines ranging from $250 to $500, according to Mayor Bill de Blasio.​

This is EXACTLY what the 2008 ACLU Pandemic Preparedness Report (which was subtitled "The need for a public health - not a law enforcement/national security - approach.") was warning against.

And, just like the lessons from history stated in the 2008 plan, COVID vaccine mandates did not slow the spread of the disease, and those mandates did an immense amount of damage by fomenting distrust in ALL vaccines. It was all very predictable to anyone who would heed those lessons from history.

Yes, it's a choice. If end time preachers who think the blood of lamb will immune them wish to voluntarily ignore pandemic time isolation orders, then face the voluntary consequences. Frankly they should arrested for bunko schemes. Isolation was the public health approach.

 

[probinson]

Yes, it's a choice. If end time preachers who think the blood of lamb with immune them wish to voluntarily ignore pandemic time isolation orders, then face the voluntary consequences.

You're just doing everything you can to pretend like there wasn't a law enforcement issue during COVID. I'm fascinated at the amount of cognitive dissonance demonstrated in these statements.

Isolation was the public health approach.

Let's go back to the 2008 Pandemic Preparedness Plan, which you falsely assert was not applicable to the COVID pandemic. Let's see what it says on page 11:

​

LAW ENFORCEMENT IS THE WRONG TOOL FOR THE JOB​

​

Lessons Forgotten​

​

Unfortunately, past lessons appear to have been forgotten. In the post-9/11 climate, public health policy has increasingly been viewed through the prism of, and indeed as a part of, law enforcement and national security. Rather than focusing on how government can work with individuals and their communities to be healthy, public health policymakers now often emphasize the need to take tough, coercive actions against the very people they are charged to help. This approach not only targets people as the enemy instead of the disease, but also encourages health officials to believe that government cannot do much to help people in an epidemic. Little thought is therefore given to what society can and should do to help people prevent and mitigate epidemics. In effect, individuals are viewed as personally responsible for the spread of illness as well as for their own care. ​

​

This law enforcement/national security strategy shifts the focus of preparedness from preventing and mitigating an emergency to punishing people who fail to follow orders and stay healthy.​

​

And on to page 19....

A reliance on coercion. Although most of the verbiage in these plans is vapid and virtually without content, and based on assumptions that will inevitably turn out to be mistaken, the one commonality they all possess is reliance on coercive actions such as quarantine and forced treatment. This is despite the fact that such measures are generally acknowledged by experts to be either completely ineffective or only potentially marginally effective in the case of flu. But law enforcement and national security continue to be the key elements, perhaps not surprising given President Bush’s first suggestion to contain a.bird flu pandemic: calling out the military to quarantine large sections of the United States to prevent flu from spreading across the country.​

​

This section gives a peek into the political motivation for this document by specifically mentioning President Bush. You see,a law enforcement approach and coercive measures are WRONG when there's a Republican President, but very right (AND NECESSARY!!!) when there is a Democrat President.

Anyone who reads this Pandemic Preparedness Plan from 2008 objectively cannot pretend like all of these warnings about using law enforcement instead of a public health response did not fully come to pass during COVID. And the ACLU was silent.

The reason I brought this plan up (with the hopes that someone would show their flip-flop on vaccine mandates) is because it's critical to understanding the current moment. If the ACLU actually believed anything they wrote in this 2008 plan, they would have been screaming from the mountaintops about the abuses of law enforcement during COVID. Instead, they hypocritically aligned with the coercive measures of the government that they warned against.

This is just one example of many. These blatant flip-flops in the name of political expediency destroyed public trust. And the results are here. Another poster pointed out that it's not just vaccines, but people are questioning their doctors more and more. Why? Because trust has been broken. And it won't be easy to regain.

 

[probinson]

If you want to see just how harmful the government-mandated COVID measures were, I highly recommend the documentary "Fire Through Dry Grass". It documents what nursing home residents in NYC had to deal with. And while some of it was COVID related, a lot of it was foolish policy decisions made by government and law enforcement. It gives a firsthand look at the approach of "isolation" and how it detrimentally impacted these people.

Synopisis​

​

Fire Through Dry Grass uncovers in real-time the devastation experienced by residents of a New York City nursing home during the coronavirus pandemic. Co-Directors Alexis Neophytides and Andres “Jay” Molina take viewers inside Coler, on Roosevelt Island, where Jay lives with his fellow Reality Poets, a group of mostly gun violence survivors.​

​

Wearing snapback caps and Air Jordans, Jay and the other Reality Poets don’t look like typical nursing home residents. They used to travel around the city sharing their art and hard-earned wisdom with youth. Now, using GoPros clamped to their wheelchairs, they document their harrowing experiences on “lock down.” Covid-positive patients are moved into their bedrooms; nurses fashion PPE out of garbage bags; refrigerated-trailer morgues hum outside residents’ windows. All the while public officials deny the suffering and dying behind Coler’s brick walls.​

​

The Reality Poets’ rhymes flow throughout the film, underscoring their feelings that their home is now as dangerous as the streets they once ran and—as summer turns to fall turns to winter—that they’re prisoners without a release date. But instead of history repeating itself on this tiny island with a dark history of institutional neglect and abandonment, Fire Through Dry Grass shows these disabled Black and brown artists refusing to be abused, confined, erased.​

​

FIRE THROUGH DRY GRASS

www.firethroughdrygrass.com

​

 

[Say it aint so]

You're just doing everything you can to pretend like there wasn't a law enforcement issue during COVID. I'm fascinated at the amount of cognitive dissonance demonstrated in these statements.



Let's go back to the 2008 Pandemic Preparedness Plan, which you falsely assert was not applicable to the COVID pandemic. Let's see what it says on page 11:

​

LAW ENFORCEMENT IS THE WRONG TOOL FOR THE JOB​

​

Lessons Forgotten​

​

Unfortunately, past lessons appear to have been forgotten. In the post-9/11 climate, public health policy has increasingly been viewed through the prism of, and indeed as a part of, law enforcement and national security. Rather than focusing on how government can work with individuals and their communities to be healthy, public health policymakers now often emphasize the need to take tough, coercive actions against the very people they are charged to help. This approach not only targets people as the enemy instead of the disease, but also encourages health officials to believe that government cannot do much to help people in an epidemic. Little thought is therefore given to what society can and should do to help people prevent and mitigate epidemics. In effect, individuals are viewed as personally responsible for the spread of illness as well as for their own care. ​

​

This law enforcement/national security strategy shifts the focus of preparedness from preventing and mitigating an emergency to punishing people who fail to follow orders and stay healthy.​

​

And on to page 19....

A reliance on coercion. Although most of the verbiage in these plans is vapid and virtually without content, and based on assumptions that will inevitably turn out to be mistaken, the one commonality they all possess is reliance on coercive actions such as quarantine and forced treatment. This is despite the fact that such measures are generally acknowledged by experts to be either completely ineffective or only potentially marginally effective in the case of flu. But law enforcement and national security continue to be the key elements, perhaps not surprising given President Bush’s first suggestion to contain a.bird flu pandemic: calling out the military to quarantine large sections of the United States to prevent flu from spreading across the country.​

​

This section gives a peek into the political motivation for this document by specifically mentioning President Bush. You see,a law enforcement approach and coercive measures are WRONG when there's a Republican President, but very right (AND NECESSARY!!!) when there is a Democrat President.

Anyone who reads this Pandemic Preparedness Plan from 2008 objectively cannot pretend like all of these warnings about using law enforcement instead of a public health response did not fully come to pass during COVID. And the ACLU was silent.

The reason I brought this plan up (with the hopes that someone would show their flip-flop on vaccine mandates) is because it's critical to understanding the current moment. If the ACLU actually believed anything they wrote in this 2008 plan, they would have been screaming from the mountaintops about the abuses of law enforcement during COVID. Instead, they hypocritically aligned with the coercive measures of the government that they warned against.

This is just one example of many. These blatant flip-flops in the name of political expediency destroyed public trust. And the results are here. Another poster pointed out that it's not just vaccines, but people are questioning their doctors more and more. Why? Because trust has been broken. And it won't be easy to regain.

""Rather than focusing on how government can work with individuals and their communities to be healthy, public health policymakers now often emphasize the need to take tough, coercive actions against the very people they are charged to help. ""

That emboldened is exactly what happened. Of course all public, those who in conspiratorial form think covid a hoax, or vaccines don't work, or social distance a sham, may not be willing to work with community to restore a healthy public. For those of that mindset yes, they had options. Exercise their defiance so it is of no harm to the public, then fine. Be a conspiratorial defiant and to hell with the public, yes, then expect authorities to remind you of your civic duty. It is in no way those historical accounts from your report.

 

[probinson]

""Rather than focusing on how government can work with individuals and their communities to be healthy, public health policymakers now often emphasize the need to take tough, coercive actions against the very people they are charged to help. ""

That emboldened is exactly what happened.

That is not what happened at all. People were punished for not following the coercive actions mandated by government authorities.

Of course all public, those who in conspiratorial form think covid a hoax, or vaccines don't work, or social distance a sham, may not be willing to work with community to restore a healthy public. For those of that mindset yes, they had options. Exercise their defiance so it is of no harm to the public, then fine. Be a conspiratorial defiant and to hell with the public, yes, then expect authorities to remind you of your civic duty. It is in no way those historical accounts from your report.

The 2008 report states in the second paragraph why it was written.

Government agencies have an essential role to play in helping to prevent and mitigate epidemics. Unfortunately, in recent years, our government’s approach to preparing the nation for a possible influenza pandemic has been highly misguided. Too often, policymakers are resorting to law enforcement and national security-oriented measures that not only suppress individual rights unnecessarily, but have proven to be ineffective in stopping the spread of disease and saving lives.​

​

The bottom line is, what we saw during COVID was EXACTLY what this report warned against.

Public trust is at an all-time low. And it should be. Our public health agencies are captured. They don't work for your health. They work for pharmaceutical profits.

Here's a great article about how pharmaceutical companies have captured our health care. I know you'll probably dismiss it as conspiracy, but perhaps someone will find it helpful.

​

Our healthcare system isn’t about health—it’s about business.​

​

And in this business, harm isn’t an accident. It’s built into the system.​

​

The more I uncovered, the more I realized:​

​

We aren’t just patients. We are customers.​

​

And we are all trapped in Big Pharma’s spider web of influence.​

​

Trapped in the Spider Web: How Big Pharma Captured Our Healthcare System

GUEST POST written by Kim Witczak

blog.maryannedemasi.com

​

 

[essentialsaltes]

RFK Jr. removes all members of CDC panel advising U.S. on vaccines​

• Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday said he is “retiring” all 17 members of a crucial government panel of vaccine advisors.
• Kennedy is removing all members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, which advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Kennedy rewrites rules on CDC panel after judge blocks childhood vaccine changes​

After a federal judge said members of the influential vaccine committee were "distinctly unqualified," an updated charter broadens the list of expertise for membership.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the use of vaccines, had been a major tool in Kennedy’s efforts to reshape U.S. vaccine policy.

In a March 16 decision, Boston-based U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy concluded that ACIP had been unlawfully reconstituted after Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist, last year removed and replaced all 17 independent experts who previously served on the panel, adding several members who share his controversial vaccine views.

In his decision, Murphy ... repeatedly pointed to the panel’s charter, which required that its members have expertise in the use and research of vaccines and immunization practices. [Seems pretty reasonable, no?]

In his decision, Murphy said the members Kennedy appointed were “distinctly unqualified,” with only six of the 15 members having any meaningful experience in vaccines.

the new charter appears to broaden the requirements for membership, listing examples of specialists in biostatistics and toxicology.

 

[probinson]

Judge Brian Murphy is, IMHO, a hack and a political activist that is "distinctly unqualified" to be a federal judge, and I suspect it's only a matter of time before the Supreme Court overrules him. Again.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Doctors across the nation are alarmed that skepticism fueled by rising anti-science sentiment and medical mistrust is increasingly reaching beyond vaccines to other proven, routine, preventive care for babies.​

​

A recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which analyzed more than 5 million births nationwide, found that refusals of vitamin K shots nearly doubled between 2017 and 2024, from 2.9% to 5.2%.​

​

Reporting Highlights​

• An Essential Shot: Vitamin K shots, which help the blood to clot, are one of three key interventions for newborns, along with an antibiotic eye ointment and the hepatitis B vaccine.
• Increasing Rejections: The government doesn’t track vitamin K rejections, but hospitals have seen a rise in parents opting out of the shots for their newborns, often driven by unfounded fears.
• Troubling Data: Hundreds of children die each year from spontaneous bleeding in the brain, a common result of vitamin K deficiency, suggesting that many related deaths go unreported.

hey entered the world the way babies should, with piercing cries announcing their arrival. They passed their newborn screening tests. Some made it to their 2-week wellness visits without concern.

Then, without warning, their systems began to shut down. A 7-week-old boy in Maryland developed sudden seizures. An 11-pound girl in Alabama stopped breathing for 20 seconds at a time. A baby boy in Kentucky vomited before becoming lethargic. A brown-haired girl in Texas, not yet 2 weeks old, bled around her belly button.

[Despite medical intervention, they died.]

Their autopsies, which took place over the last several years, all came to the same conclusion: The deaths were caused, in whole or in part, by a rare but potentially fatal condition known as vitamin K deficiency bleeding.

Although it is not a vaccine, the vitamin K shot has been swept up in the same post-pandemic tide that has led to a drop in key childhood vaccines, including for measles and whooping cough.

Two weeks ago, at a House subcommittee hearing, Rep. Kim Schrier, D-Wash., pressed Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to reassure parents that the vitamin K shot is safe. He refused and pushed back.