🇳🇱
@bluejay While generally I agree with you the military does not, and should not, have their free will. They forfeit that when they sign up. Its why they can put you in jail just for quiting the military (AWOL) without their permission.
You can have a fighting force entering a foreign country and being able to be wiped out simply from its native diseases. This is doubly true when you consider the close-nit nature of the military, disease would spread like wildfire.
@icedquinn it literallys is. That is why we can do druug tests without informing the patient whats in the drug. They agree to take the drug without knowing ahead of time what it is.
you have to be told you are going in to a clinical trial, and what the potential dangers of this might be (incl. being part of the placebo group.)
this is not some shrinkwrap shit i can hide on page 500 of the EULA and then jab you with cyanide and go "BUT FREEMO CLICKED I AGREE
"
by the way, you're a government slave now we reserve the right to test any random shit we come up with in our garage and by signing this form you consent irrevocably to be tested on.
oh yeah, Nuremberg actually says someone can refuse to continue experimenting *at any time*So not only is it ethically bankrupt its a war crime.
わんわん 
@icedquinn@blob.cat @freemo@qoto.org @bluejay@qoto.org i mean it has been fully FDA approved which is why they are mandating it now (at least Pfizer version has)
@icedquinn@blob.cat @freemo@qoto.org @bluejay@qoto.org nobody's mandating vaccines for the entirety of the public. it's only schoolchildren who go to actual public schools in some states and perhaps businesses and other public officies, which is quite frankly 100% reasonable as long as they allow medical exemptions from doctors (allergies, high risk, etc etc)
I am not against the vaccine, but no that is completely unacceptable for countless reasons.
You would think we learned our lesson when private businesses started doing this with HIV way back in the day. Those with HIV were barred from jobs, and those deemed to be a high risk for catching HIV (gays mostly) were barred under the same reasoning.
The pattern we are seeing here is frighteningly similar.
It also means that indirectly you are effectively required to expose private medical information. Say you have cancer, or HIV and that is your reason for not getting the vaccine. Now you are in a position where you have to prove to your employer that you have a medical exemption and expose to your employer that you have a private disability and effectively loose your right to keeping your disability private... we long since learned our lessons as to why that is unacceptable and here we are, doing it again.
@freemo@qoto.org @icedquinn@blob.cat @bluejay@qoto.org tbh I agree
my problem is people making their decision off of dumb baseless facts instead of informed deicions which is probably a fault of our abysmal education system
Yes, that is my problem to. But as frustrating as it is that doesnt give us the right to try to strong arm them. The solution is education, not force.
I would argue that force is far less effective as well. There was a lot of resistance to vaccines at various times in history that was overcome effectively with education. But when you use force you loose trust and ultimately increase the resistance to it rather than fixing the problem.
You will never win an argument or convince someone of the truth by punching them in the face repeatedly until they agree.
I'm not really sure it is. Every conservative and their mother has so little trust right now half of them dont even think COVID exists and are so deep int he conspiracy theory BS its getting absurd. This is a relatively new thing and it is the direct result of how the liberals are trying to strong-arm people who disagree with them, it has caused this resistance in the first place.
I can guarantee you if the liberals actually tried to play nice there would be far less resistance to a vaccine.
the 'covid doesnt exist' thing sounds ridiculous, but there have been about ~3 lawsuits or so ask for evidence that the government in question had a copy of the covid isolates they were using to make lab judgements (and thus policy) from. they failed to produce evidence one existed. that is frankly bizzare. added on top of PCR is not a real diagnostic test, but its the sole basis of the "pandemic."
So a non-test test justifies an ineffective response and people keep failing to produce isolates under court orders.
That's damned weird.
The government has nothing to do with it. Countless of scientists, non government related, have isolated covid and produced reports about it. The fact that the government isnt cooperative in any respect is hardly evidence of that.
So yea that one is completely absurd.
Can you list even a single case where a scientist who claimed to isolate it was required under subponea to provide proof od isolation and couldnt?
National health authorities, depending on whom you are refering, dont necceseraly have isolates on hand. Nor would they necceseraly be obligated to provide it, depending on the reasoning.
Who exactly was sued, and under what conditions was it refused.. be specific cite the situation and we can discuss.
telling someone with already degraded trust in experts "trust us, Nature said its totes real" isn't going to work as an argument.
It is only "weird" if you watch some concervative conspiracy theory discredited media that describes the case in a way that isnt remotely accurate.
When you actually review the case there is nothing remotely weird about it. The man wasnt suing the government and demanding an isolate, he was being fined and when he attempted to demand an isolate that had no relevance to the case in question of any kind, the court threw out his request as not being relevant to the case.
So it makes perfect sense and nothing remotely odd about it. So anyone who actually bothers to think there is some legitimacy to it is either watching conspiracy theory nonsense and repeating it or just is clueless himself.
Review the journals where isolation was attempted and see if there are any credible publications from established experts where they concluding that the COVID virus could not be isolated.
Hint: While you will find countless experiments successfully isolating COVID you wont find a single one that concluded they were unable to isolate COVID.
Link to the case your talking about. If they actively tried to isolate it and found they couldnt, then lied, that would be damning.
it's cited here for the purpose of "trust the peer reviewers" is not the answer i'm looking for. i mean some way for a civilian to verify it independently.
ex. an affadavid under penalty of perjury that it exists, or independent copies of some printout that could be used to establish they do exist.
I am not suggesting you trust the peer reviewers simply by being peer reviewers... you look at the history of the peer reviewers, the history of the publishers, and the history of the journal, and judge accordingly.
