Get flu jab or be jailed - in IRELAND

samson09

The Irish government plans to introduce compulsory "swine flu" vaccinations and is preparing to jail people if they refuse the jab.

The Irish Daily Sunday Star reports that the Irish health department is planning to activate provisions in the 1947 Health Act to enforce mandatory "swine flu" vaccinations.

Baxter, a company currently under investigation by the Austrian police for deliberately contaminating 72 kilos of vaccine material with the live bird flu virus in February, is to supply Ireland with the "swine flu" vaccines.

http://theflucase.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=598%3Airish-government-plans-mandatory-qswine-fluq-jab-or-jail&catid=41%3Ahighlighted-news&Itemid=105&lang=en

The actual article:

http://theflucase.com/images/Ireland.jpg

thomas.oleary

HA! I would rather face jail time if thats the way Ireland decide to go!

humanji

Anything more concrete than a tabloid and a blog?

samson09

Vaccination or jail?

OVER MY DEAD BODY.

My name is URL

On the off chance that this is true, it is a bit worrying.

I won't be having the vaccine anyway

CreepingDeath

I thought we have the constitutional right to refuse medical treatment.
As far as I know, no Irish law can overrule the constitution.

So this sounds like mindless hysteria.

samson09

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I thought we have the constitutional right to refuse medical treatment.
As far as I know, no Irish law can overrule the constitution.

So this sounds like mindless hysteria.

I hope so. But if you follow the link you can see the actual article which states:

"A HSE spokeswoman said "The position is that the Department is satisfied that the provisions in the 1947 Health Act for the control and management of infectious diseases gives it sufficient powers to deal with a pandemic outbreak". The Act also states that anyone who willfully obstructs the execution of a regulation-such as compulsory vaccination-shall be liable for conviction in court".

I remember posting a link to this Act during the summer and people dismissed it, stating that just because its there doesn't mean it will be used. Unfortunately those people were wrong.

I'm going to ring the HSE and various other people to see what they have to say.

I suggest others do the same and let them know how you feel about it.

eman66

Weren't the parents who didn't want their child to receive a transfusion overruled by the courts recently?

Edit: They ruled against an adult:
http://www.independent.ie/health/jehovahs-witness-forced-to-have-lifesaving-transfusion-79512.html

Captain Furball

As usual they never give s source for the hse spokesman.......
I'd say this is hyperbole.

humanji

samson09 wrote: »

I remember posting a link to this Act during the summer and people dismissed it, stating that just because its there doesn't mean it will be used. Unfortunately those people were wrong.

Well they're still right at the moment. All we have so far is someone said that someone said that someone said. It's not really enough to assume we're all to be lined up and shot if we resist.

We definitely need more information on this first.

Hal1

I can see it now, when we go to vote on 2nd October they will expect us to roll up our sleeves too. :mad:

Torakx

well if they enforce this act and force vacinne everyone, i see only one way not to go to a camp or jail and thats http://freemanireland.ning.com/ one of these type of ideas.
by the way if anyone comes across the act online please link it

samson09

Torakx wrote: »

well if they enforce this act and force vacinne everyone, i see only one way not to go to a camp or jail and thats http://freemanireland.ning.com/ one of these type of ideas.
by the way if anyone comes across the act online please link it

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1947/en/act/pub/0028/sec0031.html#zza28y1947s31

Nehaxak

To be honest, I'd actually be totally disgusted and seriously pissed off if they went ahead with something like this.
If they took out the mercury based preservative from the vaccine, or at the very least gave an option to people to get and pay for a vaccine themselves without the preservative (Themerosol is it?) then I might consider getting the vaccine but no fecking way am I putting any vaccine with that dodgy preservative in it near me or my children.
I'm also seriously concerned about that Baxter group after reading a lot of stuff about them, their incompetance and sheer disregard for the public.

Has anyone got any source or material on this at all that comes from another source, other than the Star newspaper ?

I'm fuming right now after reading about this !
:mad::mad::mad::mad:

humanji

I think it's more to do with this section: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1947/en/act/pub/0028/sec0032.html

Where it says that you can refuse to accept any treatment, but

( b ) The Minister may by order declare that—


(i) it is necessary, for the purpose of preventing the spread of a particular infectious disease, that all adult persons should submit themselves to a specified measure in relation to their protection or immunisation against such infectious disease, or


(ii) it is necessary, for the said purpose, that adult persons of a particular class (defined in such manner and by reference to such things as the Minister thinks proper) should submit themselves to such specified measure.

Although it can be argued that the disease is already spreading and mass vaccinations are fairly redundant at this stage.

Nehaxak

Look at this...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0904/1224253821294.html

At least in the US they recognise peoples concerns and are providing single does vaccines without the Thimerosal for children and pregnant women.

I absolutely will NOT vaccinate my children with that vaccination if it contains thimerosal. I can well understand the need for mass vaccination programmes to stop a pandemic and I generally have no problem with that per se but I will not put my childrens lives at risk because our health board refuse to spend a bit extra and provide an alternative like they're doing in the US.

I'll have to ask my GP if she'll import the vaccine without the Thimerosal.

I'm so mad right now about this, really, absolutely bloody fuming I am. I can't believe they're even considering doing something like this.

Sleipnir

samson09 wrote: »

The Irish Daily Sunday Star

From that alone, I'd it's entirely untrue.

Sleipnir

humanji wrote: »

I think it's more to do with this section: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1947/en/act/pub/0028/sec0032.html

So....kids would be excluded? Not much point then is there?

Nehaxak

I've made enquiries on this directly to the HSE here over the last hour or so via phone and they said the report in the Star is not true and they have no intentions of making the flu jab mandatory. The girl I was speaking too also went off on my bahalf to enquire the same of her collegues senior to herself.

In regards the availability of the jab without Themerosal, she said the HSE has no input on this matter and referred me to the IMB - which I'll follow up on tomorrow and see what I can get from them in regards that matter.

humanji

Of course, they would say that.

Nehaxak

humanji wrote: »

Of course, they would say that.

Figured someone might say that alright

She was really nice though, she went off and made a lot of enquiries on my behalf and phoned me back twice with feedback and information so I'd have to say I'd put more trust in her than the Star newspaper.

I heard this only applys to the south side .

Torakx

why get a flu jab anyway? it will have changed by the time you get the actual flu.

rameire

Deleted User wrote: »

I heard this only applys to the south side .

and people who start hysterical, outrageous and scaremongering threads.

constance tench

August 11, 2009

Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland

Nehaxak

constance tench wrote: »

August 11, 2009

Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland

The news of the investigation will come as another blow to the reputation of Poland's beleaguered and poverty-stricken national health service. In 2002, a number of ambulance medics were found guilty of killing their patients for commissions from funeral companies.

:eek:

Slugs

Lol, if they force their stupid f*cking vaccine onto us, some people are inevitably going to get hurt. Badly. Hopefully it won't come to that.

And believe me, if they do, it gives the NWO-Neo con- ALEX JON35 is our king lololololololol Side of the fence more credibility. Not that they don't have anything to begin with, but now they've more then just assumptions.

humanji

But on a plus side, it might give us a reason to oust the government.

Kintarō Hattori

Nehaxak wrote: »

:eek:

Tis true. The girlfriend was telling me about this and some other fairly shocking incidents that have happened there.

Torakx

welcome to the tip of the iceberg. please be careful when visiting the rest

alrightcuz

if the lisbon treaty is passed can europe make us take the swine flu shot???

someoneok

Nobody can make you do anything. Everything is about consent, everything. You are the sovereign. It is only words they will use. We have a fundamental human right of bodily integrity. Just be strong and for your kids sake say NO. They can't jail the lot of us. It's hysteria they want. Just say NO.

rameire

while your getting your jab
thats being forced on you
they will also inplant a chip,
sign you up to the army.
make you sterile, unless your daddy is in the nwo,
make sure you sister has an abortion,
reduce your wages to a fraction of what they are,
and give your house to mr banker who will have orgies upon orgies in your master bedroom.

T&C's apply, all of the above is created by wild imaginations

InReality

samson09 wrote: »

I hope so. But if you follow the link you can see the actual article which states:

"A HSE spokeswoman said "The position is that the Department is satisfied that the provisions in the 1947 Health Act for the control and management of infectious diseases gives it sufficient powers to deal with a pandemic outbreak". The Act also states that anyone who willfully obstructs the execution of a regulation-such as compulsory vaccination-shall be liable for conviction in court".
.

I think this might have meant stopping the campaign itself somehow , rather than refusing treatment.
Anyhow just don't go to the treatment centre.

humanji

alrightcuz wrote: »

if the lisbon treaty is passed can europe make us take the swine flu shot???

No. There's nothing even remotely connected to that in the treaty.

eth0_

If the government were going to implement this sort of thing, why didn't they do it with MMR? Mumps, measles and rubella being far more dangerous to the population than swine flu!

samson09

InReality wrote: »

I think this might have meant stopping the campaign itself somehow , rather than refusing treatment.
Anyhow just don't go to the treatment centre.

It mightn't be as straightforward as that. I dont think anyone will be physically forced to take it but life could become very hard for you if you dont.

Want to keep your job? You need to have had the vaccination.
Want to take a flight? You need to have had the vaccination.
Want to keep your child in school? They need to be vaccinated.
Want to collect the dole, childrens allowance, etc? Sorry, our records show you havent received the shot yet.

The Act refers to refusing treatment. I contacted the HSE and was told that although there was no plans at the moment to introduce mandatory vaccinations, the Health Act could potentially be used as it is the law, although it is very unlikely this will ever happen, or so they say.

I'd be more concerned about the International Health Regulations 2005 which our health minister signed upto, allowing WHO/UN to enforce mandatory vaccinations in a pandemic emergency. I suppose we'll find out in a couple of months.

samson09

humanji wrote: »

No. There's nothing even remotely connected to that in the treaty.

Even if there is nothing in the treaty now that doesnt mean they can't enforce new legislation once the treaty is passed.

If we can reject this treaty we're laughing. If it passes may God, Allah, Tom Cruise help us all!

samson09

eth0_ wrote: »

If the government were going to implement this sort of thing, why didn't they do it with MMR? Mumps, measles and rubella being far more dangerous to the population than swine flu!

You can't declare a pandemic with those disease and attempt to convince everyone in the world they need to be vaccinated.

humanji

samson09 wrote: »

Even if there is nothing in the treaty now that doesnt mean they can't enforce new legislation once the treaty is passed.

If we can reject this treaty we're laughing. If it passes may God, Allah, Tom Cruise help us all!

Passing the treaty doesn't allow them to pass any sort of legislation to do with this that can't be passed now. If they wanted to force the vaccine on people, they'd of done it already.

Hell, you even point out in the OP that the legislature is already there. So why do the government even need the "evil" EU, when they can just do it now?

humanji

samson09 wrote: »

You can't declare a pandemic with those disease and attempt to convince everyone in the world they need to be vaccinated.

And you can't do it with Swine Flu either as very few people are taking it seriously. They'd need something a lot deadlier than that. And since so many people believe that the flu is man made, it's hardly a strench to assume they could make something a lot more deadlier.

Black Uhlan

alrightcuz wrote: »

if the lisbon treaty is passed can europe make us take the swine flu shot???

I'm open to correction but this is from the Lisbon Treaty.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Article 2 E[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The Union (i.e. the newly created entity that will come about from ratification). shall have competence to carry out actions [/FONT]to support[FONT=Arial, sans-serif], coordinate [/FONT]or supplement[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] the actions of the Member States. The areas of such action shall, at European level, be:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](a) protection and improvement of human health;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](b) industry;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](c) culture;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](d) tourism;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](e) education, vocational training, youth and sport;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](f) civil protection;[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif](g) administrative cooperation.’[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][END OF EXTRACT FROM OFFICIAL EU TEXT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]My take on that is the [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"(a) protection and improvement of human health" [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]is a blanket term an could include forced vaccinations for 'our safety'.
[/FONT]

bonkey

Black Uhlan wrote: »

[font=Arial, sans-serif]My take on that is the [/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]"(a) protection and improvement of human health" [/font][font=Arial, sans-serif]is a blanket term an could include forced vaccinations for 'our safety'.
[/font]

I think you should concentrate instead on the word "coordinate" (which you also highlighted) and figure out how it means "force compliance with".

Black Uhlan

bonkey wrote: »

I think you should concentrate instead on the word "coordinate" (which you also highlighted) and figure out how it means "force compliance with".

I looked it up and coordinate means amongst other things to Organise or to bring to a common action.

Bring = enforce.

Article 2 E
The Union (i.e. the newly created entity that will come about from ratification). shall have competence to carry out actions to support, coordinate (Organise/ bring (enforce) to a common action) or supplement the actions of the Member States. The areas of such action shall, at European level, be:
(a) protection and improvement of human health;

edited:
Article 2 E
The Union shall have competence to carry out actions (vaccinations) to coordinate the actions of the Member States.

In the area of (a) protection and improvement of human health (Swine Flu Pandemic).

To the best of my knowledge to make matters worse we lose the veto on public health too.

samson09

bonkey wrote: »

I think you should concentrate instead on the word "coordinate" (which you also highlighted) and figure out how it means "force compliance with".

I think we can safely assume that such a generalised statement could mean an infinite number of things, that's the problem. Maybe it would allow mandatory vaccinations, maybe not. Who knows for sure, nobody here as far as I can tell. That seems to be a central theme of this Lisbon Treaty, its full of statements that can be interpreted in a number of ways. I'm sure the gangsters in Brussels know exactly what it means.

Pete M.

Even discussing this as being potentially true is pretty silly.

How would the powers that be enforce it?
No way would this ever happen.

Only if they bring in some German Army medical Corp or something after we get suckered and cajoled into voting yes.

Perhaps they should bring in another law that states if you vote no you don't get the jab.

Is it me or are those most likely to vote no also the most likely to refuse the jab?

I'll be voting no and refusing the jab but would hardly hold myself up as a representative sample.

Interesting though how the thread has so quickly linked the two hot topics innit?

How can we get NAMA in there....

Black Uhlan

samson09 wrote: »

I think we can safely assume that such a generalised statement could mean an infinite number of things, that's the problem. Maybe it would allow mandatory vaccinations, maybe not. Who knows for sure, nobody here as far as I can tell. That seems to be a central theme of this Lisbon Treaty, its full of statements that can be interpreted in a number of ways. I'm sure the gangsters in Brussels know exactly what it means.

Thank You, that was what I was trying to get at myself. It doesn't really make any odds how you, Bonkey or I interpret it it'll come down to the ECJ. Here is how the Lisbon Treaty's near-identical twin the EU constitution out it:

Chapter V of Title III is entitled "Areas where the Union may take supporting, coordinating or complementary action". It includes a Section 1 (Public health), consisting of an Article III-278. Paragraph 1 of that Article reads as follows:


"1. A high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all the Union's policies and activities.


Action by the Union, which shall complement national policies, shall be directed towards improving public health, preventing human illness and diseases, and obviating sources of danger to physical and mental health.



Such action shall cover:

(a) the fight against the major health scourges, by promoting research into their causes, their transmission and their prevention, as well as health information and education;
(b) monitoring, early warning and combating serious cross-border threats to health.
http://apps.who.int/idhl-rils/results.cfm?language=english&type=ByIssue&intDigestVolume=55&intIssue=4&strTopicCode=IA

Black Uhlan

Pete M. wrote: »

Even discussing this as being potentially true is pretty silly.

I'm not so sure. I mean looking at things in the best possible light and assuming nothing sinister. Forced vaccinations, ignoring the attack on civil liberties make sense in a pandemic scenario.

Take a look at Hitler's Enabling Act - It'll only take 30 seconds to read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933 . That facilatated his dictatorship, the killing of 6million Jews and you know the rest...See if you can find that in the Act. Thats the problem when you are surrendering power through regulations where such power is not exhaustive or defined much like the Lisbon Treaty.

I have no idea why anyone would want to give more power to a shower of dishonest pricks to interfere in their day to day lives. I guess some people find it hard to distinguish between personal freedoms and economic freedom.

Pete M. wrote: »

How would the powers that be enforce it?

The same way they enforce any other matters of law and order I presume.

Pete M.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

The same way they enforce any other matters of law and order I presume.

There you go, I rest my case.

If they enforce it the way they do with illegal drugs, road traffic offences, corporate governance and many other matters of law and order, then we'll hardly be looking at a 99.99% coverage with the jab?

As for reading Hitlers Enabling Act, I know we're in a bad auld way but hardly on the verge of a National Socialist Dictatorship here are we?
While some of the circumstances may be similar to pre WWII Germany, we don't have someone with the 'charisma' of Herr Hitler. Our TDs and leader may be incompetent idiots but they're hardly pure evil. If they were, our economy would be probably much better off!

alrightcuz

found this an interesting site on the swine flu
www.theflucase.com

smk89

vaccination or die mofo!!!