Swine flu vaccinations to be compulsory?

[jonny2mad]

there have been reports http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/234 ... choolgirls


and you dont know to what extent childhood jabs could have effected you there is a link between vaccines and autism mercury lowers IQ so you may not be as smart as you could have been .

[Ludwig]

I don't like this conspiracy theory nonsense about vaccines. I had the 'normal' flu vaccine last winter and I'm still around; surely that would have been a good opportunity to kill people off? Or any of the childhood vaccinations like MMR, if there was a conspiracy theory to kill us all with that surely we would have heard more than some dodgy unsubstantiated attempts to link it with the rise in autism.

Well, the point of a conspiracy is that nobody knows about it! I think people underestimate the kind of pressure that can be put on people to keep quiet; and one can be pretty sure that any mainstream journalist who tried to report it would be out of a job pretty soon - not least because there is no conclusive evidence, just lots of peculiar goings-on that raise it as a possibility.

Another thing I speculate about is the manner of the killings of the two French students: they were exceptionally brutal. It's the sort of thing that would strongly discourage anyone else from speaking out.

Or that HPV vaccine that they're giving out to girls, why have there been no mass reports of death attached to that?

I don't claim to know what's going on. All I know is that since I read of the suspicious deaths of so many biologists; the US Government's admission that it is creating bioweapons "to show how easily terrorists could do it"; the law passed in the US to allow people who've been arrested without charge to be forcibly jabbed; the law in the US that indemnifies vaccine makers against law suits.... since I read of all those things, stories to do with killer viruses and vaccination catch my attention.

Why are the PTB suddenly talking about compulsory vaccination? Normal flu kills far more people each month that swine flu has been doing.

Why has the WHO suddenly changed its definition of a level 6 pandemic so that it includes swine flu (to reiterate: it's milder and apparently less virulent than normal flu)?

Maybe there is an innocent explanation for these oddities, but no one seems in any hurry to provide one.

I don't think the swine flu vaccine is likely to kill millions of people: the virus so far has been so mild that I think a lot of people will refuse to have the vaccine.

I am anticipating a much more deadly pandemic in the next few years, one that will persuade almost everyone to be vaccinated. Who knows, one option might be to give 1 in 5 people the real vaccine, and the rest a dummy one. I am probably wrong; there are undoubtedly many other possibilities that I haven't considered because I don't have the expertise.

I just think that given the implications of PO, it is almost certain that at least some people with a lot of power have been giving thought to how to depopulate the planet neatly, rather than let the world descend into chaos.

[Silas]

Wow, this thread would make a great scifi thriller, seat gripping stuff.

As the onset of the erosion of mankinds primary energy source slowly locks on to our society's in the globalized world system and the rust plume's, food aid to struggling countries fails, riots and wars break out and well quite frankly who knows what hell potentially ensues, many will sadly die, this was inevitable from the very outset of the economic myrical that was the oil age, no engineered virus is needed. So hug your kids, live day to day, we are all in this together and we will stand or we will fall together.

It is rare now that I bother to come to powerswitch, its just to sad.

[bigjim]

there have been reports http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/234 ... choolgirls

The Express is not a credible source of information. How many of those deaths can actually be undeniably attributed to the vaccine and how many of them may well have happened whether the vaccine was given or not? Just because someone receives a vaccine and then dies several days later it does not mean to say that the two events are linked.

and you dont know to what extent childhood jabs could have effected you there is a link between vaccines and autism mercury lowers IQ so you may not be as smart as you could have been .

Thiomersal- the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines- has been phased out of most vaccines in the UK; it's only used routinely in diphtheria and tetanus vaccines and some flu vaccines. The whole MMR autism thing seems to have been caused by one man finding a possible correlation between receivers of the jab and autism sufferers- and then amplified by scientifically illiterate journalists in newspapers- but no link has ever been proven.

http://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/files/thiomersalfsht.pdf

[nexus]

Fom the Guardian today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/au ... lu-schools

Ministers plan swine flu vaccination in every school

Biggest mass immunisation in 45 years would cover all 8.5m pupils

Judging by the article this is only in the planning stages and a number of factors need to be in place before it gets the go ahead.

[Catweazle]

I like to think that a little bit of paranoia is a healthy thing to have, because there are bad people in the world, but some of the ideas I've seen here recently need medication.

Relax people, the economy is screwed and we'll all be energy-poor in 20 years but do you really think that TPTB are going to try to kill us ?

I'm sure they'll take the easier option of finding themselves a nice safe bastion somewhere and leaving us to fight over the scraps.

In fact, I think I'll join them and find myself somewhere remote, inconspicuous and self-sufficient to see out my days.

[Ludwig]

I like to think that a little bit of paranoia is a healthy thing to have, because there are bad people in the world, but some of the ideas I've seen here recently need medication.

Relax people, the economy is screwed and we'll all be energy-poor in 20 years

I think you are underestimating how bad things are going to be, and therefore how big the incentive could be for a kill-off.

I don't claim to be able to predict the future, but I observe and think a lot about human behaviour, and I think there is going to be a lot more to it than being "energy poor". Even if keeping everyone alive were an option - which I don't believe it is - most people are going to react VERY badly to the prospect of getting poorer and poorer forever.

but do you really think that TPTB are going to try to kill us ?

As I've said before, this whole debate comes down not to evidence, but what one thinks TPTB are capable of. By TPTB I don't mean Gordon Brown, but the network of individuals and organisations who wield real power in the world: secret services, corporate bosses, bankers, and certainly many politicians.

These people did not get to where they are by being idealists. They pursued power because power is what they like most. I think it is inconceivable that many of them haven't given good thought to the neatest way of dealing with the post-PO world.

I don't see why you think it so improbable; well actually I do: with respect, I think you are still looking at PO through rose-tinted specs. Even before die-off occurs, society will start to crumble because most jobs we do depend on consumerism and therefore depend on the economic growth that PO makes impossible. I don't think it infeasible that within 5 years the UK has unemployment of well over 50%. Society can't function with those kinds of unemployment rates, except by the Government instituting de facto martial law.

And don't forget: it will only keep getting worse. There WILL be no economic recovery, unless a substitute for fossil fuels is found.

So, to return to the main point: the ethical dilemma for people and organisations with power is not as great as you imagine. They do not want to lose their power in a post-peak world, but if society were reduced to rubble, even they would have a tough time, wherever they lived. If I were in their shoes, I'd be wanting to pre-empt the die-off in order to keep our civilisation's structure intact.

Die-off is going to happen, and it might even be viewed as merciful to kill people off quickly rather than let them starve over decades, with our infrastructure crumbling into the bargain.

As I've mentioned, depopulation was publicly advocated on PNAC's Web site - straight from the horse's mouth.

I've listed elsewhere cirumstantial evidence that some kind of depopulation plan is afoot. If this evidence can't be explained by my thesis, it has to be explained by either an alternative thesis, or by coincidence. I can't offer a statistical analysis of the probability of coincidence: but I trust my judgment, and my judgment does not accept the coincidence theory.

With respect, I think you are naive and making the common human assumption that because today is like yesterday, tomorrow will be like today, give or take a bit of disposable income.

[MacG]

No need for a big conspiracy when a small will do just fine for an explanation:

We have a bunch of big pharma companies who are in deep structural sh*t. Their business models are plainly outdated and they will not survive for much longer.

Their business model looks like this:

1) Invent new lifesaving compound
2) Get a patent on said compound
3) Sell the stuff and make shareholders and management filthy rich.
4) When patent expire go to 1).
5) Repeat indefinitely

Well, the last 20 years they have not managed to get many blockbuster drugs going, and the few they got going have some severe problems which only marketing could cure (for a while).

The entire cholesterol thing is about as dead as it can be. Not only are patents expiring, but the underlying medical theories were wrong. SSRI's are based on an erratic model also, and the true mechanism of the compounds are unknown (placebo effects are prime suspects for many of the effects). Cardiovascular does just fine with old compounds selling for lose change and breathmints.

The last 20 years they have managed to make their business models *look* viable by endless mergers though.

So, what is a poor pharma company to do when facing death? Another year or two with profits from vaccines would be really nice! Add sales of some patented controlled release versions of Xanax and similar stuff for managing anxiety in scared people, and "swine flue" suddenly look *very* attractive.

Conspiracy - yes, probably. Not to kill though, just to make some money.

[Ludwig]

No need for a big conspiracy when a small will do just fine for an explanation:

We have a bunch of big pharma companies who are in deep structural sh*t. Their business models are plainly outdated and they will not survive for much longer.

Their business model looks like this:

1) Invent new lifesaving compound
2) Get a patent on said compound
3) Sell the stuff and make shareholders and management filthy rich.
4) When patent expire go to 1).
5) Repeat indefinitely

Well, the last 20 years they have not managed to get many blockbuster drugs going, and the few they got going have some severe problems which only marketing could cure (for a while).

The entire cholesterol thing is about as dead as it can be. Not only are patents expiring, but the underlying medical theories were wrong. SSRI's are based on an erratic model also, and the true mechanism of the compounds are unknown (placebo effects are prime suspects for many of the effects). Cardiovascular does just fine with old compounds selling for lose change and breathmints.

The last 20 years they have managed to make their business models *look* viable by endless mergers though.

So, what is a poor pharma company to do when facing death? Another year or two with profits from vaccines would be really nice! Add sales of some patented controlled release versions of Xanax and similar stuff for managing anxiety in scared people, and "swine flue" suddenly look *very* attractive.

Conspiracy - yes, probably. Not to kill though, just to make some money.

You make some fair points, and you may well be right - at least this time round.

I don't think your argument addresses some of the other suspicious goings-on in and around the pharma industry, for which there are no doubt many possible explanations. I have merely been presenting one possibility, that seems to me to fit the facts quite well. However, I don't of course know all the facts.

I've been starting from the premise that many people with power, money and connections have known about PO for a long time, and from there wondering what sorts of plans they have been hatching to make sure they're ahead of the game WTSHTF. If retaining their power is an option, they're going to try and do it; why WOULD they just sit back and wait for the wave of chaos to wash over them?

[Cran]

I've been starting from the premise that many people with power, money and connections have known about PO for a long time, and from there wondering what sorts of plans they have been hatching to make sure they're ahead of the game WTSHTF

The main thing is keep out of the way and stay alive while it all kicks off...

You don't really need to kill 80% of the population, you just need to survive while 80% of the population die...

If I was 'one of the elite' I'd simply be ensuring that I had somewhere safe to hang out for a year or two WTSHTF

[MacG]

I've been starting from the premise that many people with power, money and connections have known about PO for a long time, and from there wondering what sorts of plans they have been hatching to make sure they're ahead of the game WTSHTF

The main thing is keep out of the way and stay alive while it all kicks off...

You don't really need to kill 80% of the population, you just need to survive while 80% of the population die...

If I was 'one of the elite' I'd simply be ensuring that I had somewhere safe to hang out for a year or two WTSHTF

Comments for both:

Nothing is beyond imagination, sure! Weird people hatch weird plans all the time and nothing is impossible. Some of those plans might even get acted out. If I was appointed project leader for "Project Depop" I see a couple of huuuge problems though:

1) The various "leaders" I have met IRL have few -if any- clues about how the physical world works, and they would not be very safe in their hideouts. Entrepreneurial hands-on types will most probably find (and eat) them. Pass the salt, please.

2) The world is pretty interconnected and it is impossible to know who is needed and not. A major pandemic might break the entire system and then old Darwin get to work overtime.

As a member of "the elite" I would do just about anything to keep the current system running. After all, "the elites" are defined by the system and without system there wont be any elites - or at least there would be a very high degree of "social mobility" both up and down before a new system had settled.

[Cran]

Comments for both:

I'd do the same if I wasn't one of the elite...

[Cran]

btw like the avitar...

[RenewableCandy]

If it's depopulating, who's doing it? The people who developed H1N1 or the people who want us all to have the "vaccine"? /[:tinhat:]

... because unlike you and Vortex I have the humility to accept that they might know things I don't.

...If you dispute that fact, do some research rather than shower me with your smug smart alec accusations of tinfoil hattery.

...One thing that won't change my mind is being told I'm a loony by people who, even though they won't admit it, make clear in their statements their subconscious belief that the coming years are going to be merely some variation on business as usual.

... so piss off.

Blimey. It was a genuine question. The tinhat wasn't meant as a serious insult.

Fyi I did read a lot of the PNAC stuff when it was still up, and I happen to have known personally (though admittedly not very well) one of the biologists who died in odd circumstances.

[Ludwig]

1) The various "leaders" I have met IRL have few -if any- clues about how the physical world works, and they would not be very safe in their hideouts. Entrepreneurial hands-on types will most probably find (and eat) them. Pass the salt, please.

Well, my thesis is that it's the entrepreneurial hands-on types who possess the real power. In many countries, particularly America, many if not most senior politicians have their fingers in all sorts of business pies in any case. This is why I don't think it is as far-fetched as many here believe to talk of a global elite.

If such an elite exists then clearly it is difficult to guess exactly where hapless figures like Gordon Brown fit in. Whatever his faults I imagine Brown is essentially a decent person who would probably have reservations about being included in any depopulation plan. That's not to say, however, that I think he'd necessarily blow the whistle.

Anyway I don't have a fully worked-out theory; there's no point trying to fill in gaps in one's knowledge with wild guesses. I just think, as I said, that we are not being told the full story about swine flu.

2) The world is pretty interconnected and it is impossible to know who is needed and not. A major pandemic might break the entire system and then old Darwin get to work overtime.

I would think that the number of people who are truly indispensable to keep civilisation running probably doesn't run into more than a few thousand. I think it would be quite feasible to draw up a list of such people and ensure that they all get the "right" vaccine.

Most of us, even those of us who like to think of ourselves as intelligent, are just drones, and entirely replaceable. As long as there are intelligent, educable people around after a die-off, the system can survive.

As a member of "the elite" I would do just about anything to keep the current system running. After all, "the elites" are defined by the system and without system there wont be any elites - or at least there would be a very high degree of "social mobility" both up and down before a new system had settled.

Exactly, that's what I was implying.