Defense Secretary wants to mandate COVID-19 Vaccinations

| August 5, 2021

Both Biden and Harris said no when asked if they would take the coronavirus vaccine that Trump was pushing.

Lloyd Austin, Defense Secretary, is going to ask for authorization to make COVID-19 vaccines mandatory for those on active duty. This request is expected to come this week. Normally, these kinds of orders do not happen until the Food and Drug Administration fully approves the vaccine. However, Joe Biden can waive this requirement, paving the way for these vaccines to become mandatory for those on active duty.

From CNN:

Austin’s “inclination is towards making the COVID-19 vaccine mandatory” for active duty troops, a defense official told CNN.

If the Secretary makes that final recommendation, he could seek a presidential waiver to allow the vaccine to be administered to troops before full approval by the Food and Drug Administration. A Pentagon decision and recommendation on how to proceed could come this week, several officials say.

Biden announced on July 29 that he was asking the Defense Department to “look into how and when” it will add the COVID-19 vaccine to the list of mandatory military vaccinations. Biden specifically said he knew that Austin is “open to it.”

Since then, the Joint Chiefs have met to discuss how a mandatory vaccination plan might work. Austin has also been consulting with military medical authorities, the defense official said. Austin’s current view is to “seek authorization to make it mandatory.”

Joe Biden hinted that he wants something like this to occur. CNN has the article here.

Category: "Teh Stoopid", "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves", Military issues

Comments (71)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Old tanker says:

    1st what do I win?

  2. Old tanker says:

    Not really liking the mandate bit at all. I dislike carrying a medical card to go anywhere as well. Fortunately I live in a free state and have serious doubts the dementia in chief will be able to enforce it here.

    Loving the video’s of Florida’s Governor going right after the dementia in chief as well.

    • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

      FUNNY HOW those who called US “fascists” are now demanding that people carry travel papers just like in Nazi Germany or the USSR!

  3. President Elect Toxic Deplorable Racist SAH Neanderthal B Woodman Domestic Violent Extremist SuperStraight says:

    Every day
    In some small way
    I thank the Lord for my DD214 woobie.

    I can see enlistments and re-enlistments crashing, and many good troops refusing assignments as they know those assignments will be set up to fail.

    • Sparks says:

      ^THIS^

    • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

      I was on a good-sized Army Installation a few days ago and all I could think was “OH SHIT, those Troops are being treated like hell!”. In an area of occupied barracks the grass was knee-high in places and the buildings that were about 20-25 years old looked like they hadn’t been pressure washed in at least ten years, those Troops I saw out walking around had their eyes on the ground looking like they worshipped the day they were to ETS. Meanwhile the Congressclowns in DC fatten their wallets day after day while getting fat off of insider info to trade on as well as pocketing bribe money and other things from lobbyists while traveling in taxpayer-funded luxury.

  4. Sapper3307 says:

    2/PANTHER/6 GFYO<<< OVER!

  5. KoB says:

    More people control. But we said before that this was coming. News feeds are full of similar stories. Like we talked about the other day, businesses wanting to see your “papers” to let you in. Another one from the airlines, no shot, no fly. And companies, requiring you to take the jab to keep your job. GMAFB!

    If I didn’t already know how two faced and devious the demonrats were, I might shocked at how they’re acting in re the vaccine.

  6. Graybeard says:

    The Tyrants display themselves openly.

  7. Roh-Dog says:

    Say if they do this and the serious complication rate is very high in a population that is all but impervious to serious cases that require hospitalization, will they stop with the government-sponsored, large corporation-enabled psyop of this virus with a 99.98% survival rate?
    Asking for a friend who has deadbeat tenants and no peaceful means to petition the government(s) for redress of grievances.
    To the Military of the United States, if you allow this to happen to yourselves, We, a concerned Union of Freedom yearning People, are next.
    What happens by force to the least of us becomes Law for the remainder.

  8. CDR D says:

    That fat asshole does resemble Idi Amin.

    • Poetrooper says:

      And he’s taking a sledgehammer to military morale just like Idi Amin took ’em to personally beat to death prisoners of his murderous regime…

  9. penguinman000 says:

    With the change to Feres doctrine in the 2020 NDAA, I’m wondering how this will shake out. Can’t imagine doctors, nurses, HMs, medics, PAs, etc.. aren’t going to be concerned about potential liability.

    • SFC D says:

      Joe and Lloyd don’t care about that. Joe told the CDC to ignore the supremes, why shouldn’t he ignore this law too?

  10. Jay says:

    The ol’ Gunny/Supply Thief/Recruiter-man in me sees a couple of crooked Corpsman getting ready to make a FORTUNE.

    “Yah bro. Slide me a hundred and i’ll update your shot record. Come by the barracks later and i’ll have your card.”

    Never underestimate the graft, Lloyd.

    • Sparks says:

      Jay I was thinking just this reading the post. I remember when a Med Tech or Corpsman could be had for $20. And they never ever lacked for change.

      • Jay says:

        Gotta charge 100 now, m’man. With gas and lumber prices going through the roof. Inflation is a biatch.

        Hell, working in Supply: I had a wall locker FULL of “acquired” gear that I could assist a young motivator with his check out sheet.

        As a young Marine myself, my bro worked at CIF when they first opened. He deleted my entire profile and I kept my entire issue.

  11. LC says:

    What kind of America is this when a General mandates something like this for their troops? What would the Founding Fathers think?!

    https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html

    (Yes, I’m gently trolling here.)

    • thebesig says:

      From the reference:

      “At the time, the practice of infecting the individual with a less-deadly form of the disease was widespread throughout Europe. Most British troops were immune to Variola, giving them an enormous advantage against the vulnerable colonists. (Fenn 2001, 131) Conversely, the history of inoculation in America (beginning with the efforts of the Reverend Cotton Mather in 1720) was pocked by the fear of the contamination potential of the process. Such fears led the Continental Congress to issue a proclamation in 1776 prohibiting Surgeons of the Army to inoculate.”

      George Washington, along with the other Founding Fathers, was a history buff. This practice was in place the previous century, so he had an extensive track record to work with. This is not the case with the current vaccination… Designed to fight the very global pandemic that is still ongoing. In the United States, the vaccines being used are still waiting for full approval for use.

      • LC says:

        In the United States, the vaccines being used are still waiting for full approval for use.

        Out of curiosity, if they are approved, will you change your tune and think it’s perfectly fine they’re mandated?

        For me, the notion that this is some new kind of technology and thus bears considerably more risk is one of those things with a kernel of truth.. but a mountain of misunderstanding.

        We have a pretty good understanding of how the immune system works, especially at the macro level. We have a very good understanding of how to build structures with certain protein-binding structures, and how to do that with mRNA. Some of that stuff has been studied for decades. So while the vaccine in this form is ‘new’, it’s a bit like saying you should be careful about getting a 5G iPhone, since it’s new, and only 4G ones have been tested. That some parts of the process are new doesn’t mean we don’t understand them, it just means they’re the latest iteration.

        For a medical analogy, I had a friend dealing with cancer not too long ago – and instead of dexamethasone, an antiemetic, to tackle his nausea from the other components of his chemo, they used GERSC, which uses granisetron in a relatively new method of delivery involving extended release. Technically, this is ‘new stuff’ (GERSC), but at the conceptual level (granisetron, and other antiemetics), it’s been studied for decades. Like mRNA for building specific proteins.

        Obviously there’s still some careful science done to ensure it’s safe, but that’s been true of the COVID vaccines too. So I feel the ‘extensive track record’ applies here, too.

        • Poetrooper says:

          Funny how that “Been used safely by hundreds of millions for decades” argument didn’t seem persuasive to you with Hydroxychloroquine, hmm, LC?

          • LC says:

            I think HCQ is safe at low doses… and ineffective in treating COVID at those dosages. At higher dosages, more cardiac issues were found, if I recall,.. and without a commensurate increase in effectiveness at treating COVID.

            In other words, it’s not just about safety – it’s about safety and effectiveness. HCQ doesn’t offer the latter.

        • thebesig says:

          LC: Out of curiosity, if they are approved, will you change your tune and think it’s perfectly fine they’re mandated?

          First, you failed to understand what I was saying above. Medication and vaccinations go through a process from the time they’re concepted until the time they are approved. Testing has to show that they meet the requirements that the Food and Drug Administration sets. Meaning, at this stage, they are experimental vaccines. Which leads to my second point…

          Second, no, I would not “change my tune”. I would still be opposed to these vaccines being mandated given the time crunch involved with bringing this vaccination to bear. We do not have that track record that I mentioned in my initial response to you.

          Third, I don’t trust the Biden Regime.

          LC: For me, the notion that this is some new kind of technology and thus bears considerably more risk is one of those things with a kernel of truth.. but a mountain of misunderstanding.

          False on the part of the “mountain of misunderstanding”. There are reports coming in on the negative effects this vaccine is having on some of those who are taking it. They’ve even had to stop administering one of these vaccines pending further review. You can not substitute years of testing and adjustments needed to come up with a vaccine that is as not as “eventful” regarding adverse health effects as this one.

          LC: We have a pretty good understanding of how the immune system works, especially at the macro level. We have a very good understanding of how to build structures with certain protein-binding structures, and how to do that with mRNA. Some of that stuff has been studied for decades. So while the vaccine in this form is ‘new’, it’s a bit like saying you should be careful about getting a 5G iPhone, since it’s new, and only 4G ones have been tested. That some parts of the process are new doesn’t mean we don’t understand them, it just means they’re the latest iteration. [STRAWMAN]

          Based on your argument, creating vaccines and bringing them into the market should not take long. But the fact of the matter is that they take years of testing and FDA review before they’re finally brought to bear. The existence of other coronaviruses that impact us on a yearly bases, the need to retake the flu shot each year, and the inability to come up with a cure for the common cold, etc., shows that more than a textbook understanding of how these viruses operate as well as the corresponding theories on how to address these.

          There is no real comparison between technology, 4g versus 5g, and biology, coronaviruses. There are a lot more variables involved in nature, to include our immune systems, than what is involved with creating a new generation of technology.

          So this isn’t a simple matter of saying, “Oh, this is a new iteration”. We’ve been doing this with colds and flues for years, yet we’re nowhere near being able to cure the cold or create the long term immunity that these vaccines aim to do.

          LC: For a medical analogy, I had a friend dealing with cancer not too long ago — and instead of dexamethasone, an antiemetic, to tackle his nausea from the other components of his chemo, they used GERSC, which uses granisetron in a relatively new method of delivery involving extended release. Technically, this is ‘new stuff’ (GERSC), but at the conceptual level (granisetron, and other antiemetics), it’s been studied for decades. Like mRNA for building specific proteins.

          We’re not talking about DNA/microscopic level of virus structure with your medical analogy. Doctors address your analogy numerous times, they look at a combination of symptoms, look at what medication is being taken, then see about changing the medications around to enhance their combined effects while minimizing the negative effects.

          • LC says:

            First, you failed to understand what I was saying above.

            You said they were still awaiting full approval for use, and I simply asked if you would change your tune if full approval is given. What was the misunderstanding?

            Second, no, I would not “change my tune”. I would still be opposed to these vaccines being mandated given the time crunch involved with bringing this vaccination to bear.

            So, you’re opposed to the very program that President Trump helped organize to cut through red-tape and get vaccines made faster? Interesting. It’s one of the few things I agree with him on.

            We do not have that track record that I mentioned in my initial response to you.

            Correct in the literal sense, and to most scientists, incorrect in the spirit of things. If it takes me ten years to build a boat and have it pass safety standards today, and I manage to streamline that process and get it down to two years, while using the same (bio)physical principles and same safety processes, just accelerated, you can literally say you don’t have the same track record of a 10-year span of time for development,… but you can also say it’s passed the same process. The same is true here.

            Third, I don’t trust the Biden Regime.

            The great thing is… you don’t have to. Countless other countries, free of Biden’s witchcraft and devilry, have also conducted trials and approved the vaccine’s use there.

            Now, maybe you’re not the sort to trust them either. But thankfully there’s a preponderance of data you could also look at, and if you do so objectively, you’d also see they’re pretty damn safe. If you don’t trust that because there’s some amazingly secretive yet massively huge conspiracy involving doctors from dozens of countries all falsifying data in a singular effort to .. what exactly I don’t know, actually.. well, I hope you get the help you need.

            False on the part of the “mountain of misunderstanding”. There are reports coming in on the negative effects this vaccine is having on some of those who are taking it

            You can’t simply say, “False!”. That’s like Michael Scott trying to just ‘declare’ bankruptcy. Sure, there are reports -valid ones!- on negative effects. They’re relatively small in number. They shouldn’t be ignored, but a proper weighing of risk and reward leads to an obvious conclusion.

            This is a bit like how, sure, wearing seatbelts has cost people some lives when they couldn’t escape an accident fast enough. There are documented cases of that. But you know what? There’s a lot more cases where the seatbelts saved lives.

            Based on your argument, creating vaccines and bringing them into the market should not take long. But the fact of the matter is that they take years of testing and FDA review before they’re finally brought to bear.

            Once again, the whole point of Operation Warp Speed was to expedite this process – it’s a good, necessary thing. Aren’t conservatives the ones who feel government is too bureaucratic? It often takes over a decade to bring a new drug to market here… but that’s not the case everywhere, and it’s not clear it needs to be the case here.

            Yes, we want to be safe – things like thalidomide were caught by an observant FDA reviewer, saving lives here, but her refusal to authorize it had to do with a lack of evidence of safety. That was over sixty years ago – bioinformatics and the information age weren’t even a thing yet. You don’t see how our massive improvement in health metrics, monitoring and general knowledge might allow us to accelerate a time-line based on better data?

            There is no real comparison between technology, 4g versus 5g, and biology, coronaviruses. There are a lot more variables involved in nature, to include our immune systems, than what is involved with creating a new generation of technology.

            These vaccines are a new generation of old technology – they prime an immune response in ways we’re very familiar with. More complex, sure, and still warrant safety precautions, but they remain an evolution of what we’ve done before, not a completely new revolution.

            So this isn’t a simple matter of saying, “Oh, this is a new iteration”. We’ve been doing this with colds and flues for years, yet we’re nowhere near being able to cure the cold or create the long term immunity that these vaccines aim to do.

            And we may never be able to fully cure this virus now, either. But that’s because it’s so prevalent now, and still mutating, and likely establishing non-human reservoirs as well, in a mutated form. But we have done an incredible job at eliminating, effectively, smallpox. And we’ve done pretty damn good at greatly reducing others, too. The flu and COVID may be with us for a long, long time, but to point to them as evidence we can’t control diseases while ignoring the ones we’ve been successful with is a bit odd.

            We’re not talking about DNA/microscopic level of virus structure with your medical analogy.

            We’re also not talking DNA with COVID. It doesn’t affect your DNA. The point remains, we often try new things in medicine. Generally not on an entire population at once, granted, but suggesting we exist in a static world where the FDA approval process always takes the same amount of time, ignoring both the quality and quantity of data we have today, vs in the past, is foolish. These things are intertwined, and we can, and should do better.

            • thebesig says:

              Response to LC, August 6, 2021, Part 1A

              LC: You said they were still awaiting full approval for use, and I simply asked if you would change your tune if full approval is given. [REPEAT POINT]

              What I said in response:

              “First, you failed to understand what I was saying above. Medication and vaccinations go through a process from the time they’re concepted until the time they are approved. Testing has to show that they meet the requirements that the Food and Drug Administration sets. Meaning, at this stage, they are experimental vaccines. Which leads to my second point…

              “Second, no, I would not “change my tune”. I would still be opposed to these vaccines being mandated given the time crunch involved with bringing this vaccination to bear. We do not have that track record that I mentioned in my initial response to you.” — thebesig

              LC: What was the misunderstanding?

              Did you not read my response to you last time you said that? You should not be asking me if there was any misunderstanding on my part. The misunderstanding was on your end, and it was deliberate. Your response above indicates that you’re the one that’s misunderstanding what’s being said.

              Asking me if I would change my tune once the medication is approved is an attempt at a strawman argument. A key concept, that you missed in my rebuttal to you, is context. What was the context of my initial response to you? Your question missed the contexts and reflected your assumption of what my standing would be.

              LC: So, you’re opposed to the very program that President Trump helped organize to cut through red-tape and get vaccines made faster? [STRAWMAN]

              I direct your attention to the title of my article above, emphasis mine:

              “Defense Secretary wants to mandate Covid 19 vaccinations” — thebesig

              What part of “mandate” do you not understand? And, how does my opposition to mandating a vaccine equate to my “opposing” it all together?

              Hence, instead of asking me where the misunderstanding is, you need to ask yourself that question. You need to thoroughly, and clearly, understand both what I’m saying, and the context of what I’m saying.

              Your response attempted to defend such a move, to mandate, by bringing George Washington into the picture. My rebuttal indicated a track record that existed prior to George Washington’s time versus the one that we have right now.

              You brought in a strawman argument with George Washington’s orders. You continued to advance strawman arguments in your responses. It is your strawman arguments that I continue to reject, don’t mistake that as my “not understanding” what it is you’re saying.

              LC: Interesting. It’s one of the few things I agree with him on. [STRAWMAN]

              Again, my opposition to the MANDATE is not my opposition to the vaccine itself. I’m simply being objective. I’m fully vaccinated with the Covid-19 vaccine (Moderna). I’ve been so for well over three months now.

              I took it voluntarily, knowing what I told you above and knowing other factors related to the vaccine. The cold hard reality is that the vaccine is experimental. By taking the vaccine, I volunteered to be an experimental subject for the vaccine that is an early phase of the vaccine’s evolution. I volunteered to take it despite the risks that others have actually experienced.

              We have a right to decide whether to be a part of an experiment. Even if the vaccine is approved, we have a right to reject both medications and vaccinations. There are other means to address Covid once it is contracted. There is no need to force a vaccination on someone when there are other treatments that have proven to work.

              LC: Correct in the literal sense, and to most scientists, incorrect in the spirit of things.

              FALSE, from a scientific standpoint. When I talked about track record, I was saying it from a scientific perspective in addition to a historical one. As a doctoral student, principles and practices related to the scientific method are things that I have to implement while completing my courses. It is ultimately what we are going to use to generate our dissertation and scientific papers right after that.

              Additionally, I have access to a portal leading me to multiple academic journals that include medical journals containing scientific papers done on COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines.

              I am correct from a scientific perspective, and you are incorrect with assuming otherwise.

              LC: If it takes me ten years to build a boat and have it pass safety standards today, and I manage to streamline that process and get it down to two years, while using the same (bio)physical principles and same safety processes, just accelerated, you can literally say you don’t have the same track record of a 10-year span of time for development,… but you can also say it’s passed the same process. The same is true here. [STRAWMAN]

              I’m sorry, but building a boat, were pretty much the same resources to build that boat has been in existence for decades, even centuries, is not the same thing as dealing with a new kind of virus that had not been discovered, studied, over the decades.

              Also, you’re not using biological materials to build your boat in this scenario. You would not have to repeatedly go to boat building and repair school just to be able to keep building boats, or to develop your own boat model. This is not the same thing as working on a vaccine to deal with a microscopic invader.

              What you talk about falls under Total Quality Management, Lean Six Sigma, and other quality management initiatives in the manufacturing sector. We are not talking about the same thing here.

              When it comes to a novel coronavirus, or a novel infection, a whole bunch of factors come into play. These are biological factors, especially involving the new coronavirus/virus. Unlike the resources and materials that you could grab, touch, hold, inventory, etc., when building a boat, there are a whole bunch of unknowns when dealing with DNA/RNA, virus, cellular structure, etc.

              There is no comparison between what you’re trying to argue here, and with the novel coronavirus.

              LC: The great thing is… you don’t have to. Countless other countries, free of Biden’s witchcraft and devilry, have also conducted trials and approved the vaccine’s use there.

              First, before I argue a topic, two conditions have to be met. One, I had to have extensive knowledge on the topic being argued gained through firsthand experience or study/research. Two, the person that I’m arguing against clearly does not understand the topic being argued.

              In this situation, my extensive knowledge comes from the study/research. Again, as I mentioned above, I have access to scientific databases that give me access to entire papers written on the novel coronavirus.

              Second, my mention of the Biden Regime has to do with their power grabbing, Constitution disrespecting, etc., initiatives. Nothing to do with “witchcraft” or “devilry”.

              You erroneously assumed that I was not aware of other vaccines. Contrary to your erroneous assumptions, I’m aware of other vaccines being used overseas. I’m also aware that they too are facing the same glitches in those countries, in many instances worse, then what we are experiencing over here.

              One of the studies used, by the CDC, was one done in India based on a vaccine they use over there that is not used in the United States. Hence, one of the reasons why I don’t trust the Biden Regime… They are using data that includes a vaccine not being used in the United States to come up with a conclusion on what should be done in the United States. That is, from a scientific perspective, scientifically irresponsible.

            • thebesig says:

              Response to LC, August 6, 2021, Part 2A

              LC: Now, maybe you’re not the sort to trust them either. But thankfully there’s a preponderance of data you could also look at, and if you do so objectively, you’d also see they’re pretty damn safe.

              Again, I have access to scientific papers done, on Covid-19, done around the world. This includes vaccination efforts being conducted. Looking at this data objectively, as you erroneously assume I am “not” doing, shows vaccine injuries above what one would expect from a vaccine with a long track record of use and improvement.

              The argument is not about their safety shortfalls, but about their lack of track record, as well as the amount of injuries from these vaccines compared to vaccines that have been in use for decades.

              LC: If you don’t trust that because there’s some amazingly secretive yet massively huge conspiracy involving doctors from dozens of countries all falsifying data in a singular effort to .. what exactly

              You have no leg to stand on, referencing scientists, or their methods, if you’re going to dismiss the opposition to your preferred findings as “a conspiracy”. That is not how science works. The scientific process involves an extensive research of available scientific papers. That research results in research questions that the researchers aim to investigate. These research questions will bring researchers, and their resulting papers, into different directions.

              Meaning, the trend of scientific research would bring people away from the consensus rather than toward it. Doctors and scientists who disagree with your stance on the vaccines, as well who disagree with the scientists and doctors that you support, are not conspiracy theorists. They have a scientific duty to express their findings.

              Also, you have no leg to stand on dismissing the opposition as “falsifying data”. Emphasizing data that is being ignored by the CDC, the Biden Regime, or any group that you support is not “falsifying data”. Bringing that data to bear, to open debate, is what is supposed to happen in science.

              LC: I don’t know, actually.. well, I hope you get the help you need.

              Again, I don’t engage in an argument on a topic unless two conditions are met: one, I have extensive knowledge of the topic being argued gained through firsthand experience and/or research/study; two, the person that I am arguing with clearly does not have a grasp of the argument being argued.

              I’ve used these conditions in the almost 18 years I’ve debated with people on the Internet. Meaning, when I engaged in an argument with the opposition, I have always come out of these debates with the exact same argument that I had before getting into the argument. My standing by the facts does not make me someone “in need of help”. That’s something a propagandist would say to someone that refuses to swallow his propaganda.

              LC: You can’t simply say, “False!”. That’s like Michael Scott trying to just ‘declare’ bankruptcy. [STRAWMAN]

              FALSE! If I tell you that your argument as “false” or “wrong”, then indeed your argument is “false” or “wrong”. Again, see the criteria that I use before I engage an argument with someone. I don’t just say words like “false”, just for the “hell of it”. I’m just describing things as I see it, just like I would by calling a red fire hydrant a red fire hydrant.

              LC: Sure, there are reports -valid ones!- on negative effects. They’re relatively small in number. They shouldn’t be ignored, but a proper weighing of risk and reward leads to an obvious conclusion.

              There are more reports of vaccine injuries than what you’re trying to claim. From a scientific perspective, to include what is done when testing a vaccine, those negative effects are addressed with the view of adjusting the design of the medication to reduce those negative effects.

              That would normally done during the testing phase when the vaccine is not being used during an emergency, where a statistically significant number of test subjects are being tested, and the percent negatively impacted comes close to accurately reflecting a similar situation with the whole population.

              This goes back to what I indicated above, regarding vaccinations going through rounds of testing and FDA review. This normally takes years for many vaccinations and for many drugs. This way, less individuals suffer the negative effects when the vaccine/medication is rolled out into the market is fully approved.

              LC: This is a bit like how, sure, wearing seatbelts has cost people some lives when they couldn’t escape an accident fast enough. There are documented cases of that. But you know what? There’s a lot more cases where the seatbelts saved lives. [STRAWMAN]

              Once again, you’re comparing apples to oranges. The majority of us wear seatbelts every time we get into a personal vehicle or someone else’s personal vehicle. We wear our seatbelts year in and year out. Seatbelts have a track record of success, that those instances were seatbelts have failed, when compared to when they did not fail, is not even close enough, proportion wise, to compare to vaccine injuries that occur with the Covid 19 vaccine when compared to the total number of vaccinations given. More people have ridden in a car with a seatbelt on than people who have taken the vaccination. We are not taking the vaccination every day, every week, every month, etc., but we do frequently get into our vehicles and put our seatbelts on.

              LC: Once again, the whole point of Operation Warp Speed was to expedite this process — it’s a good, necessary thing.

              Do I need to explain to you a concept versus the practical knowledge needed to implement that concept? You could call it anything that you want, to express the urgency and need to bring this vaccine online. That is not going to change the physics and biology involved with making it a possibility.

              These vaccines are not fully approved, and they have not gone through the years of testing, development, adjustment, etc., that they would normally be going through.

              What they did was reach for the minimum, and then rolled out the vaccination on an emergency basis with emergency approval. What this accelerated process did was condense the testing to full field use, combining these two steps. This resulted in a larger number of “test subjects” involved with vaccine development. More people are going to get injured, even die, then what would be the case if these vaccines were tried on a sample population with each phase of sampling/trial meeting approval before going to the next phase.

              LC: Aren’t conservatives the ones who feel government is too bureaucratic? [STRAWMAN]

              This has nothing to do with vaccination’s limitation. Yes, the government is too bureaucratic, there are too many bureaucrats forcing policy on the rest of us.

              However, vaccine development is being done by companies. It’s not just the slow-moving bureaucratic process that holds things down, but the development, testing, redesign, etc., of these vaccines that draw the process out. This testing goes through a period of trials on animals before going through a period of trail on humans. Even with less bureaucratic tape, drug companies would take a long time fielding a vaccine or medicine that would be safe for use for medical purposes.

            • thebesig says:

              Response to LC, August 6, 2021, Part 3A

              LC: It often takes over a decade to bring a new drug to market here… but that’s not the case everywhere, and it’s not clear it needs to be the case here.

              One of the main reasons why takes over a decade, or a long time, to bring a new drug into the market, is the intricacies involved with what the medication is treating. We are dealing with biology, microscopic variables that science does not completely 100% understand (contrary to popular opinion). There is plenty of room for error.

              With the COVID-19 Vaccine, many of the steps were skipped to field this vaccine to the general public. The United States is not the only one that did this, other countries did it as well. I remember, when this pandemic got underway, seeing a video clip of Chinese scientists talking about the long run out processes needed to create a vaccine for the coronavirus. They were dealing with these issues in other countries as well.

              The laws of biology do not change across international boundary. Everybody had to condense the process to bring something out once it reached minimum utility given vaccine injuries. The only thing that makes this “not the case here”, is the urgent need to address the pandemic itself. A lot of risks are being incurred in the process that normally would be worked on during the development and testing phase.

              LC: Yes, we want to be safe — things like thalidomide were caught by an observant FDA reviewer, saving lives here, but her refusal to authorize it had to do with a lack of evidence of safety.

              She was able to do that, because we did not have a condensed process to field a drug in the marketplace. She had the convenience to withhold her approval pending further review of a study that she read related to the negative impacts that thalidomide had.

              If she were under similar conditions that does fielding the coronavirus vaccines were under, and had she approved it for that purpose is, the things that she worried about would have seeped over into the general population, resulting in more injuries.

              Herein is one of the points that you keep missing. The rapid fielding of the coronavirus vaccines, shortening what should be a longer process, exposes the public to more injuries than what they would be normally exposed to if this vaccine went through the normal development period and approval processes.

              Imagine, if you will, thalidomide being mandated for use on the public, without the full trial process in place back then.

              LC: That was over sixty years ago — bioinformatics and the information age weren’t even a thing yet. You don’t see how our massive improvement in health metrics, monitoring and general knowledge might allow us to accelerate a timeline based on better data?

              Again, I have access to a database that leads me to studies related to both the coronavirus and the coronavirus vaccines. Contrary to what you might think, no, we are not in better position now than what we were during Frances Kelsey’s time, when it comes to developing vaccines/drugs and bringing them to bear in the medical sector.

              Again, the laws of biology do not change. Nature does not change, despite the advances we’ve had over the past decades, even centuries, we are still in the same predicament as previous scientists were… Having to deal with variables involving microscopic items. Back then, as now, we still have a lot of unknowns that we must deal with.

              Improvements in health metrics, monitoring, and general knowledge has not changed the biological and physical realities that come into play when concepting, designing, developing, testing, etc., new drugs.

              Understand that when it comes to science, research done that results in a scientific paper does not always provide us with answers that the researchers were looking for… However, with every research done, the researcher discovers that there is a lot more that is not known than what was thought to be known. This expands as time progresses. Often, researchers discover that we don’t really know a specific topic more frequently than they find the answers they were hoping to find.

              So no, we are not in a better position, and your variables do not overturn scientific reality.

              LC: These vaccines are a new generation of old technology — they prime an immune response in ways we’re very familiar with. More complex, sure, and still warrant safety precautions, but they remain an evolution of what we’ve done before, not a completely new revolution.

              It’s not as simple as you’re trying to make it. No, you can’t compare this to a new version of technology, re, 4G to 5G. What you mention, setting the immune response to respond in a way its familiar with responding, is not as easy feat to do artificially on a novel coronavirus/sickness as it would be on an illness that had been addressed for decades.

              Again, there are many microscopic variables at play when it comes to the immunization. We have had the flu vaccine for a long time. Even in this situation, where the technology exists to address an ongoing sickness, the developers still miss the mark with a percentage of those who are vaccinated.

              However, unlike the flu vaccine versus the flu, a novel coronavirus presents challenges that researchers have not came across before. Attempting to use your argument to address this challenge would be like the English colonials trying to use open field battle tactics in the frontiers, against Native Americans using guerrilla warfare tactics.

              So yes, creating a vaccine, like the one for this novel coronavirus, represents a new track beyond the normal evolutionary track of ongoing vaccinations and medications.

              LC: And we may never be able to fully cure this virus now, either. But that’s because it’s so prevalent now, and still mutating, and likely establishing non-human reservoirs as well, in a mutated form. [STRAWMAN]

              Again, you’re missing both point and context. You argued that this was simply “a new iteration” in an attempt to explain away the safety concerns. This is key… whether to mandate something that is performing now the way it would perform during a test that would result in a redesign of the vaccine being tested to reduce the risks for ultimate medical use.

              The point is not on whether we’re going to ever eradicate this virus or not, but on whether to MANDATE a vaccine that has a similar track record as experimental vaccines that do not get approved until they address the vaccine injuries that come with experimenting with a vaccine.

              Now, as time goes on and these vaccines are redesigned and improved so that injury percentages related to them are similar to injury percentages of other vaccines, and their efficacy is proven without as high a percentage of injuries as they currently have, and it is further proven that they preserve mission effectiveness, then we could argue in favor of mandating the vaccines for certain professions… Just as other approved vaccines have been mandated and implemented in the military.

            • thebesig says:

              Response to LC, August 6, 2021, Part 4A

              LC: But we have done an incredible job at eliminating, effectively, smallpox. And we’ve done pretty damn good at greatly reducing others, too.

              It took us decades of effort and development for an effective vaccine specifically for the sicknesses that you mention here… With vaccines that were fully approved for use on the public. We don’t have those decades behind us with regards to the novel coronavirus and the vaccine brought in to deal with it. The COVID-19 vaccine is still in its early stages as far as track records go, and it still faces periods of improvement ahead of it. Until we have that time frame, and an improved safety record compared to improved efficacy, you can’t use the above epidemic viruses to argue in favor of mandating a novel vaccine.

              LC: The flu and COVID may be with us for a long, long time, but to point to them as evidence we can’t control diseases while ignoring the ones we’ve been successful with is a bit odd. [STRAWMAN]

              First, read my responses to you with the intention of understanding what I’m saying. The argument is against mandating a novel vaccine that is still in its early stages.

              Second, you attempted to use 4G v 5G technology to describe this new vaccine and insinuated that many of the variables that are in play in these viruses are also in play with the current one. So yes, I’m going to bring in the fact that we’ve been dealing with the flu virus, and evolving the flu vaccine over and over again, to prove that specific point wrong.

              Third, what you should have gotten out of this is that you’re advancing a strawman argument, failing to understand both what I’m saying and the context of what I’m saying, and missing the point of my argument against you… Which maintains the theme of the above article… Mandating a vaccine that is relatively new and is still in need of improvement to reduce the injuries related to taking it.

              LC: We’re also not talking DNA with COVID. It doesn’t affect your DNA. [STRAWMAN]

              Where, in any of my posts on this thread, did I argue that the novel coronavirus affects DNA? Where?

              Go back and read what I said with the intention of understanding what I’m arguing. You attempted to bolster your argument by talking about how your friend used GERSC vice an antiemetic to deal with his nausea. You shifted from dealing with the structure of viruses, which must be addressed when developing and improving vaccines, to talking about what to use when dealing with nausea.

              What I said, not included in your quote, which further qualifies what you quoted:

              “Doctors address your analogy numerous times, they look at a combination of symptoms, look at what medication is being taken, then see about changing the medications around to enhance their combined effects while minimizing the negative effects.” — thebesig

              Reading comprehension… It’s a drug.

              LC: The point remains, we often try new things in medicine.

              No, you missed the point and, as I indicated above by including the part of my response that you ignored, you’re comparing apples to oranges. When talking about the novel coronavirus or the novel vaccine used to address it, you have to look at details of the virus structure, and of the structure of the vaccine at the microscopic level.

              Trying new things in medicine is not the point of my argument, or of the original blog article above. The point involves mandating a vaccine that does not have decades of a track record that involves increased safety and reduced injuries as time goes by.

              LC: Generally not on an entire population at once, granted, but suggesting we exist in a static world where the FDA approval process always takes the same amount of time, ignoring both the quality and quantity of data we have today, vs in the past, is foolish. These things are intertwined, and we can, and should do better. [STRAWMAN]

              Wrong, I’m not arguing that we live in a static world where it “takes the same amount of time to approve a vaccine and to field it in the market”. I’m arguing against mandating a vaccine that does not have a track record of use and of vaccine improvement.

              Your strawman argument of what I’m arguing is foolish, and so is the poor judgement you’re exercising with your insisting with arguing this topic with me.

              I’m arguing from both a historic and scientific standpoint. You don’t just mandate a vaccine on an entire population, whether that is in the military, in an organization, etc., until the vaccine is developed to the point that vaccine injuries are minimized to the level to what could be found with other vaccines.

              Mandating these vaccines, early in this stage, especially when there are other preventative and treatment regimens available, is simply forcing a population to fulfill the role of test subjects, even if these vaccines get full approval from the FDA.

              If people want to take the COVID-19 vaccine, I’m fine with that. I’m fully vaccinated (Moderna). However, just because millions of others, and I, decided to take it does not mean that I would demand that other people take the vaccination… They have every right to not want to take the vaccination… Again, especially if there are other preventative and treatment methods that have successfully been used to reduce the chances of getting the novel coronavirus or, once they get it, reduce the severity of the symptoms. People have used methods that you’re not exactly a fan of, and have came out of it. Donald Trump is an example.

    • penguinman000 says:

      While this is a good piece of trolling, we are at where we’re at re: COVID vaccinations largely because of the nutjobbery of the dems when Trump was in office.

      They did their damndest to undercut public confidence in the vaccination. “There’s no way they will be able to roll out a vaccine in less than a year.” “You cant trust the vaccine because Trump had a hand in it” etc.. All in an effort to gain political points.

      Combine that with the blatant coverup of COVID origins (by the WHO, China and the MSN) and things like the CDC suddenly setting housing policy, Helen Keller or Ten Second Tom could’ve seen this coming.

      But no. These dipshits thought that now their party is in office, they can suddenly stuff the genie of distrust back in the bottle?

      The dems, in their frenzy to get rid of President Trump, have managed to politicize and undermine confidence in public health in a way that hasn’t happened in my life time. Next time the repubs are in office we’re going to see them do the same types of things. It’s disgusting and short sighted.

      I want my country back.

      • Ex-PH2 says:

        “…stuff the genie of distrust back in the bottle”…. Eloquent and to the point.

        They forgot that old saying, didn’t they?

        Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.

        And here we are.

        No, I don’t trust them, either, because their splatter-gabbling was all about “hate Trump”, “don’t trust the vaccines”, and now – well, it is backfiring on them but good.

        The wails of idiots are almost loud enough to break tempered glass….

      • LC says:

        While this is a good piece of trolling, we are at where we’re at re: COVID vaccinations largely because of the nutjobbery of the dems when Trump was in office.

        I agree that statements from people like Harris, above, weren’t helpful, but I think it’s a big stretch to say that’s largely why we’re in the spot we’re at now.

        Look, had Trump and other Republicans all come out and told people to get vaccinated, you bet your ass there’d be some segment of the left that wouldn’t do it for that very reason. But I think that segment is significantly smaller than the holdouts on the right. For that matter, look at polling on the issue – far more conservatives than liberals are rejecting the vaccine.

        And to me, it’s utterly wild that you’ve got people like Tucker Carlson, who is apparently vaccinated, ranting about vaccines most nights. You don’t see that from people on the left, do you?

        … And maybe you do, in which case I’d love to learn about it. See, part of the problem is we tend to hear the most outrageous things the people we disagree with say, and not the outrageous stuff that happens on sides we agree with. Or, we hear it and dismiss it. In my opinion, that’s why you feel -and this is not an attack on you- that the problem is largely because of the left undercutting the vaccine.

        I know plenty of people on the left who’ve never heard that, because by and large, it’s not the message put out. Similarly, you’ve got people like Mitch McConnell, whom I abhor with every fiber of my being, doing a lot of good by advocating for the vaccine… but many on the left don’t know that, either.

        At the end of the day, things like this shouldn’t be the least bit political, regardless of what you believe. We’ve got hundreds of millions of doses in people, and no mass die-off, or people being taken over by Bill Gates, or other such nonsense. And the simple fact that recently 99% of the deaths in the hospital were unvaccinated peopled speaks volumes, and does so without any mention of Democrat or Republican. That’s what people should listen to.

        So yes, the Democrats who pushed distrust of the vaccine early on are at fault. And the Republicans who continue to do so, daily, are at fault now. I’m inclined to say more fault rests with those pushing such nonsense now, since the vast, apolitical volume of data speaks more clearly than any politician.

        • Poetrooper says:

          LC says, “Look, had Trump and other Republicans all come out and told people to get vaccinated, you bet your ass there’d be some segment of the left that wouldn’t do it for that very reason.”

          Some segment???

          As your ol’ bud Biden would say, “C’mon, man!”

          You know damned well the refusal rate would have been far higher than it is now simply because: Trump. And the rioting across this country would have occurred in every venue controlled by Dems with a degree of violence that would make Antifa and BLM look like Eagle Scouts.

          LC says, “At the end of the day, things like this shouldn’t be the least bit political, regardless of what you believe.”

          While any honest assessment of your opposition to Hydroxychloroquine was purely political, based on your animosity to anything proposed by Trump and you damned well know it.

          LC reminds me of Pat Paulson in his long ago presidential campaign:

          • Poetrooper says:

            “While any honest assessment of your opposition to Hydroxychloroquine WOULD SHOW IT was purely political,”

            Mea culpa…

          • LC says:

            You know damned well the refusal rate would have been far higher than it is now simply because: Trump. And the rioting across this country would have occurred in every venue controlled by Dems with a degree of violence that would make Antifa and BLM look like Eagle Scouts.

            I’d have taken a vaccine if it were endorsed by Trump, and decried by Democrats… so long as it was also endorsed by scientists. I get my medical perspective from scientists and physicians, not politicians. That tends to be the case among nearly all whom I know on the left, so yes, some segment.

            While any honest assessment of your opposition to Hydroxychloroquine was purely political, based on your animosity to anything proposed by Trump and you damned well know it.

            My opposition to HCQ was from the data — I’d have absolutely loved if it were shown to be effective. Fuck, that’d have saved a lot of lives! But it wasn’t.

            And I’m on the record here for applauding Trump for Operation Warp Speed, which helped to bring the vaccines out much faster.

            https://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=98952&cpage=1#comment-3294625

        • penguinman000 says:

          LC, I’m of the thought the damage from the VP and President casting doubt on the COVID vaccine during the campaign did far more damage than that idiot Hannity every could.

          First they said don’t trust it because of Trump. Then once they got into office they said it’s safe.

          The MSM ran with the bat origin story and made the lab leak seem like a wild eyed conspiracy theory.

          Meanwhile the CDC was (probably unknowingly or from lack of administrative competence) indirectly funding gain of function research on this virus in the lab. Not to mention the bipolar positions they’ve taken on masks regardless of the evidence.

          Social media is blocking actual medical professionals from providing information re: the risks of the vaccine.

          Now there is real talk from elected officials about shutting people out from sectors society if they don’t have proof of COVID vaccinations.

          Not to mention, the vaccine is approved under an EUA. We have no idea what the long term impacts are going to be. Pretending there aren’t real concerns that should be addressed and considered is a public health policy failing of biblical proportions. This is something President Trump should’ve had a plan to address. But he isn’t in office any more. It’s now up to President Biden and VP Harris.

          And yes, there are some on the right who are also fanning the flames. However, their impact isn’t nearly as large as those on the left.

          Besides, wasn’t one of the common complaints about Trump “He isn’t acting Presidential.”

          Well, here’s President Biden’s and VP Harris’s opportunity to act Presidential. It’s 8 months and I’m still waiting….

    • ninja says:

      LC:

      But….

      Did Washington make them wear masks after they were vaccinated?

      (I can troll gently as well…)

      😉😎

      BTW…Do you still believe COVID came from Bats, i.e. Wet Market?

      Isn’t that what you believe about a year ago while some of us said it came from a Lab?

      😊

      • LC says:

        BTW…Do you still believe COVID came from Bats, i.e. Wet Market?

        Isn’t that what you believe about a year ago while some of us said it came from a Lab?

        Not to sound like a politician, but allow me to give a thorough answer.

        First, if I did (and I have immense faith in your digital ninjitsu to find such posts if so), then a) I was very likely wrong, and b) it was almost certainly early on.

        I’ve been saying it probably escaped from the lab for a long time now. Very early on, it seemed entirely possible it was natural spillover between a host species and a human. This happens all the-fucking time in places, including Africa and Asia, and while there was indeed the Virology Institute in Wuhan, there were also plenty of bats around, the reservoir host.

        When they couldn’t identify a host animal, and you’ve got people at the Wuhan Institute getting sick, and China trying to hide that,… well, that speaks volumes. The probability a virus makes the jump to people and coincidentally just happens to be near the lab, where people got sick, and with no host animal found despite a search? It starts to look pretty suspect.

        And that’s been my position for a while now. I still don’t know, and may change my mind more, but it’d take a lot of evidence to shift it away from that at this point. I’d also say that changing one’s mind based on new data shouldn’t be a bad thing.

        But if I did say it was from the wet market, mea culpa. I no longer think that.

        I will, however, draw one more distinction – it isn’t just between ‘wet market’ or ‘lab’, there’s a lot of people who feel this was a bioweapon, and/or intentionally leaked. To me, those both seem ridiculous. An accidental leak, not an attack, is the likely culprit, I think.

        • Sparks says:

          That’s a lot of coincidences to swallow there LC.

        • ninja says:

          LC,

          Highly appreciate your honesty and feedback.

          Thank You.

        • Poetrooper says:

          “If…if…if…”

          Weasel words…

          • LC says:

            No weaseling; I honestly can’t remember, and wanted to give ninja a full answer. Some of us aren’t completely cocksure when lacking any facts, and allow ourselves to change our minds about things as new information comes to light. So my thinking did change – as it did on lethality, too, which very early on seemed much higher.

            I think that’s how most people operate, Poe. It’s called learning. I recommend trying it some time!

            • Poetrooper says:

              Well while we’re dealing with open-mindedness, LC, may I remind you that it was you, the man who says he listens to physicians and the science, who was willing to deny the use of a certain modality as a treatment option in dealing with a medical emergency because there were no studies specific to the safety and efficacy of that treatment.

              You didn’t just say you would not take it yourself should you become infected, you wanted its use prohibited for everyone, even by those physicians who had already used it and obtained favorable results.

              Citing public safety, you didn’t think the FDA should authorize its off-label use in the face of a pandemic even though it might possibly have saved countless lives. This with a drug with a half century history of safety in hundreds of millions of patients.

              Yet now, here you are not just cheerleading these much more questionable vaccines, whose safety is far from being established, but disparaging those who have serious doubts about both their short and long-term safety as well their efficacy.

              And you do this in spite of VAERS data showing thousands of deaths attributed to these COVID vaccines. That is reportedly more deaths than associated with all previous vaccines.

              I don’t suppose you have any data on deaths due to treatment of COVID with hydroxychloroquine do you? I thought you might have been following those stats since you were so concerned about its safety that absolutely no one should be allowed to use it until lengthy studies had been completed.

              On the other hand, rather than insist that hydroxychloroquine be used by everyone, I and others simply argued for physicians’ ability to use it where they saw fit.

              You said no…

              Now, I say let those who want the vaccine get all the shots they desire (and it’s starting to look like it’s going to be ongoing) and let those who have doubts make their own decisions.

              You say no…

              For someone who denies that politics play any role in your medical decisions, your stances certainly do seem to frequently coincide with those whose politics seem to govern every belief and decision.

              Oh, and they insist the science is on their side, too.

              Cocksure, indeed…

              Oh, and just to help me continue my admittedly slowed learning process, according to your science, how many genders are there now? It’s hard for an octogenarian geezer to keep up with the continually evolving science of the Democrat party.

              😜😜😜

        • Penguinman000 says:

          You weren’t alone in falling for the bat story LC. I was there at first too.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Good point, LC, and CV19 is not exactly like smallpox, is it? No, nor is it like polio, or the swine/avian flu viruses that shift every year by mingling with each other.

      • LC says:

        No, of course not, but do you think if we hadn’t eradicated polio decades ago, and were facing that battle now, we’d succeed?

        Polio claimed far fewer lives than COVID, yet we still managed to unify around a vaccine and defeat it. That was no more an assault on ‘freedoms’ than having to stop your car at a stop sign.

        At what point does an infectious disease that threatens communities require some responsibility on behalf of individuals?

  12. MCPO USN says:

    Austin=Flaming train wreck as SecDef. Only put there because he has a pucker that fits any Democrat ass.

    This is going to be quite a problem. I have been getting texts from people saying they will refuse the shot and are willing to be separated or retire. There are more of them than the SecDef thinks, and the only recruits that could be brought in are liberal pussies.

    So go for it, Joe. Fuck something else up.

  13. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    Y’know, some private outfits are producing the vaccines and I uhhhm was kinda wondering what profits they might be making off of it and now that Biden has been inflicted upon us I wonder just how many politicians that are pimping for everyone to get it are PROFITING off of the mess via owning stock in said companies?

    • Sparks says:

      Absolutely a great question. If it is like most industries with the ubiquitous lobbyists, I am sure they are getting their palms well greased.

    • Poetrooper says:

      API, I read somewhere a few months ago that it had already surpassed $20 Billion for the American producers.

  14. ninja says:

    And in the meantime, more and more Illegal Aliens are pouring into our Country…

    And it looks as if not all of them are from Central America…

    One has to wonder where they are heading…and if they are spreading the Virus…

    BTW…How many Unborn lose their life on a daily basis?

    Asking For A Friend.

    🤔

    • 5JC says:

      You don’t suppose that any of those people flooding across the border and being put in to communities all around the country are carrying the virus do you? I’m sure they were all tested and vaccinated before being placed in communities all around the country. Because it would be completely nuts to do otherwise and could lead to a massive outbreak all over the place. No way our current government would be that stupid as to cause a secondary outbreak. Those guys are like really smart and stuff.

    • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

      Ninja, just before the hyperbole came out about the “Delta variant” there was hype about a “Lambda variant rearing its head in Peru, spreading through Central and South America. NOW THAT we have hordes of illegal aliens pouring over out Southern Border, nearly all of them unvaxxed, I’m betting that the current Administration is trying to infect the USA with that variant just like the B. Hussein 0bama admin tried to get Ebola established on US Soil!

  15. QMC says:

    Sooooooo close to retirement…

  16. ChipNASA says:

    I don’t know how legit this is BUT this was posted on Gab as an alternative to taking the jab.

    ———–
    I have been receiving dozens of direct messages on Gab over the past week with people from around the country sharing the horrors from inside the United States Military and their places of employment regarding “mandatory” non-FDA approved experimental Covid vaccinations. Many people are being forced to choose between feeding their families and getting injected with a potentially deadly experimental substance. This is a fundamental violation of not only human rights, but the religious rights that we are guaranteed in the United States of America.

    I stumbled upon a set of religious exemption documents that the creator calls an “air tight religious exemption request” for the COVID vaccine if it is mandatory for you at work, school, or in the military. You can download these here and customize them to your individual scenario.
    (https://news.gab.com/2021/07/29/important-download-covid-vaccine-religious-exemption-documents-here/)

    The Full Document is everything necessary for a US Army Soldier to submit a religious exemption request to his immediate commander, with only certain portions needing to be edited to include your name, unit, and details.

    The “Religious + Practical Side Supporting Documents” contains all of the details giving both the religious reasons for why Christians cannot receive the Vaccine, and the practical reasons for why it isn’t actually necessary to receive the Vaccine.

    The Religious and Practical Side Supporting Documents are also separated in case you specifically need either one without the other.

    We are human beings made in the image of God. We have God-given human rights and should not be forced to choose between feeding our families and putting something that is potentially deadly into our bodies. As a reminder Gab.com is the only social network on the internet that allows criticism and discussion about the experimental non-FDA approved Covid vaccine.

    God be with us all.

    Andrew Torba
    CEO, Gab.com
    Jesus is King

    Click Here To View The Download Links For These Important Religious Exemption Documents and Please Share the Link with a Friend!

    (https://news.gab.com/2021/07/29/important-download-covid-vaccine-religious-exemption-documents-here/ )

  17. SFC_K says:

    I believe that America is a signatory to the Nuremburg code regarding medical experimentation. This vaccine is still in the experimental phases.

    1.The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

    This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

    The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

  18. USMCMSgt (Ret) says:

    Considering Biden said 350 billion people in this country have received the vaccine, no need to get one (since there are a little over 333 billion.