Mysterious "Victorian" Figure Sighted in Closed Wal-Mart in California

Sarah McConnell
The Daily Source

Mystery surrounding the coincidental closings of five major Wal-Mart superstores across the United States continues to grow as recent footage from within one of the stores appears to depict a strange figure crossing between a row of aisles in an area closed off to the public.

The video, uploaded by Youtube user DAHBOO77, contains footage sent to him from a contact known only as "Stephanie" who was able to infiltrate the Wal-Mart in Pico Rivera, California and record a brief glimpse beyond the makeshift barricades that had been set up to obstruct the view of the store's interior. A still shot of the location can be viewed at the video's 0:23 mark in which the figure can clearly be seen staring at the camera.

The mysterious figure appears to be a male dressed in full Victorian-era attire, complete with top hat, scarf, and blue suede overcoat. 

Quickly making the rounds to the far corners of the internet, speculation has already arisen that the figure may in fact have inter-dimensional origins: "There is now reason to believe that what they are doing in these Wal-Marts involves occult rituals and the summoning of otherworldly entities," states internet commenter Jeremy Laughlin. "I know it sounds crazy but from an energetic sense it is entirely possible that portals to other dimensions of time and space can be activated via rituals... perhaps that the man in the video (is) from there. [sic]"

Others have shared in the theorizing that what is taking place may in fact be of a nefarious nature. John Colbine of Pierz, Minnesota states on Facebook: "I wouldn't be surprised if they are connecting a subterranean tunnel system in these Wal-Marts. Anyone who knows anything about the corporate connections to FEMA and the New World Order plan for a massive cull of the population would definitely admit that there is something sketchy going on here. Nothing adds up."

Though the company has stated that the store closures are due to extensive plumbing issues that are scheduled to take place over the course of the next six months, many former Wal-Mart employees are not buying it. Some have suggested that the closures are "retaliatory," conjecturing that their involvement with OUR-Walmart, an employee benefits advocacy group, is the real reason behind the closures. 

Several alternative media outlets have confirmed that none of the alleged plumbing permits have been purchased in the respective towns in which the work would be taking place. A number of industrial plumbing specialists have also come forward to declare that even in a worst-case scenario the entire plumbing structure of a Wal-Mart superstore would take nowhere near six months to fix.

Mandatory Vaccines: SB 277 will Unleash "Medical Civil War" in California as Parents Demand Doctors be Arrested for Felony Assault

(NaturalNews) It is a fundamental and non-debatable scientific truth that all vaccines have inherent health risks. The spectrum of harm varies widely, from small skin rashes to full-blown neurological damage and lifelong debilitation. Some children have even been killed by vaccines, and the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid out nearly $3 billion to families of children who were provably injured by vaccines in America.

The UK government, similarly, has just agreed to $90 million in financial compensation to victims who suffered permanent brain damage from another vaccine. (You will not find any truthful reporting on vaccine injuries in quackpot mainstream media publishers like the Washington Post, of course. They are largely funded by Big Pharma and therefore propagate the junk science delusion that vaccines never cause any injuries at all.)

Because vaccines have the potential to cause harm -- and do indeed cause severe harm, injury and even death for some children -- when they are forced upon people against their wishes and consent, they represent a form of medical violence against women and children.

"Vaccine Violence" is very real, in other words, and it is a form of violence against women and children that the state of California wants to commit via government coercion. That's the whole point of SB 277, the so-called "vaccine mandate" law. It seeks to eliminate all religious or philosophical exemptions from vaccines, thereby forcing a potentially harmful medical intervention onto the bodies of children (and soon, adults) who did NOT give consent to the procedure.

As the SB 277 website explains, "If there is a RISK, there must be a CHOICE."

Federal sentencing guidelines characterize a vaccine assault as a serious felony crime

As background on this point, it is important to note that individuals carrying the HIV virus have been charged with felony assault crimes for spitting on people or engaging in sexual intercourse with them.

The state of Ohio, for example, considers it a "felonious assault" to be an HIV-positive person and have sex with someone without informing them of your HIV status. (SOURCE) Those found guilty of this assault are sentenced to up to 11 years in prison.

This is because HIV-positive people are generally believed to carry live viruses which can enter another person's body and cause them harm. This is precisely the same situation encountered with many vaccines, where faulty quality control procedures have resulted in "live" viruses being administered to people through polio vaccines (see the history of 98 million Americans exposed to cancer viruses via polio vaccines), MMR vaccines (which shed live viruses, causing the recently vaccinated to readily infect others), flu vaccines and many more.

According to federal law enforcement, a needle is categorized as a "weapon" in the context of a physical assault. For example, if you were to acquire the blood of an HIV-positive person, fill a syringe with it, then assault someone with that needle, you would not only be charged with a felony assault, but an assault with a deadly weapon (the needle).

Under Ohio law, for example, it is explained as: "...causing or attempting to cause serious harm with a deadly weapon or a firearm -- referred to in the Ohio statutes as a 'dangerous ordnance.'"

When administered without consent, a vaccine injection is a physical violation of a human body. The substance contained in the vaccine is provably harmful and, in some cases, even deadly. Under Ohio sentencing guidelines, an individual forcing a vaccination upon someone without their consent would be committing a "felonious assault with dangerous ordnance."

Federal sentencing guidelines and vaccine violence

Under federal sentencing guidelines, a vaccine assault upon an individual without their consent would be considered an "aggravated assault," part of the category of sentencing covering "offenses against the persons."

As explained in this sentencing guidelines document, the "base offense level" of a vaccine assault (i.e. aggravated assault) is 14.

This document goes on to explain, "If the assault involved more than minimal planning, increase by 2 levels." Because all vaccine violence against children is premeditated, it qualifies as "more than minimal planning."

This sentencing guideline also explains "[if] a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) was otherwise used, increase by 4 levels." Because a needle containing a potentially dangerous substance is considered a "dangerous weapon" by all law enforcement organizations -- including local police, the FBI, etc. -- this elevates the vaccine violence to an even higher level.

If that needle weapon "...was brandished or its use was threatened, increase by 3 levels," says the sentencing guidelines document.

Where injury occurs, the aggravated assault becomes even more serious

"If the victim sustained bodily injury, increase the offense level according to the seriousness of the injury," says the federal sentencing guidelines document.

Bodily Injury = + 3 levels
Serious Bodily Injury = +5 levels
Permanent or Life-Threatening Bodily Injury = +7 levels

Permanent bodily injury would include brain damage or autism, by the way, both of which are caused by vaccines. Even the CDC has evidence that vaccines increase the risk of autism, as publicly admitted by CDC scientist and whistleblower William Thompson. We also know as an established fact that vaccines cause permanent brain damage. The UK government, in fact, just agreed to pay out $90 million in financial awards to families whose children were brain damaged by the swine flu vaccine.

Finally, this sentencing guideline document explains, "If the assault was motivated by a payment or offer of money or other thing of value, increase by 2 levels."

Because virtually all doctors are financially influenced by vaccine manufacturers through extensive bribery networks, they are also guilty of being "financially motivated" to participate in the vaccine assault of an innocent child. This would add +2 levels to their sentencing. (Flashback: GlaxoSmithKline admits to running massive illegal bribery network involving 40,000 doctors across the United States. The U.S. Justice Dept. prosecuted this case after a company whistleblower stepped forward.)

In total, an act of vaccine violence against a non-consenting person would qualify, under U.S. federal sentencing guidelines, as a Base Offense Level of 22 even if no injury was sustained by the child. If an injury is sustained, that Base Offense Level could rise to 25, 27 or 29 in the case of permanent brain damage.

Why doctors committing vaccine violence against children would earn 41 months (or more) in federal prison

What do these numbers mean in terms of sentencing?

According to this federal sentencing guidelines table located on this federal sentencing website, an offense level of 22 would earn someone with no criminal history a minimum of 41 months in prison.

A base offense level of 29 would result in 87 months in federal prison.

An act of vaccine violence committed against a non-consenting person, if prosecuted by law enforcement authorities, could earn a doctor serious prison time regardless of whether the child was actually injured by the vaccine.

Will California parents start calling 911 and pressing assault charges against doctors?

All this brings up a very important question for Californians, SB 277, medical freedom and the rule of law.

If California claims to be a state operating under the rule of law, then laws regarding aggravated assault must apply equally to all people, including doctors. If an adult or child is forcibly violated against their consent with a needle weapon known to pose a real threat to that child's safety, that act clearly qualifies as aggravated assault.

Under both federal and state law, parents who believe their children face the risk of imminent harm from a violent attack upon their bodies have every right to call 911 and request armed police officers come to their defense to stop the assault and arrest those attempting to commit those acts of violence.

I am now publicly predicting that, should SB 277 be signed into law, we will see a wave of California parents calling 911 to report their doctors while demanding the government press felony assault charges against medical personnel engaged in vaccine violence.

It is doubtful, of course, that District Attorneys would carry out any government-sponsored prosecution of those doctors, but parents will retain the right of CIVIL prosecution of those doctors for violating their civil rights.

Doctors have no immunity against civil lawsuits stemming from vaccine violence

The civil prosecution of those administering forced vaccines upon children is not in any way protected by the legal immunity from liability which has been granted to pharmaceutical companies by Congress. That protection only exempts the drug companies from lawsuits of injury and harm caused by vaccines. It does not confer any legal immunity to doctors and medical personnel who personally engage in the acts of violence -- i.e. administer the vaccines -- against the consent of the parent(s).

In a court of law, there can be little doubt that a coercive violation of a child's body with a potentially deadly substance is a violation of that child's civil rights (and human rights). An assault with a vaccine needle is no less of a crime than an assault with a surgeon's scalpel. Both are "medical instruments" which may cause permanent damage and even death.

The "intent" of the doctor administering the vaccine in no way immunizes that doctor from the letter of the law. Even if the doctor testifies that he "intends" to protect the child, that does not negate the fact that he willfully carried out a felony assault upon the body of that child with a dangerous weapon. There is exhaustive legal precedent to support my contention here. While intent is a factor in sentencing, it alone does not negate the act of assault with a dangerous weapon.

All that is necessary to see this happen is for parents to start calling the police

Fascinatingly, California parents already have the power to unleash this law enforcement campaign against anyone administering vaccines without consent. State and federal laws are written to protect innocent victims against their bodies being physically violated / assaulted, and citizens merely need to invoke those laws which already exist.

Parents who believe their children are being placed in harm's way by vaccine violence might call 911, demand police arrive on the scene, and express their genuine belief that their children are about to be assaulted with a dangerous weapon. Of course, parents engaging in this action might risk a visitation by Child Protective Services, another enforcement arm of an oppressive government that demands obedience to the pharmaceutical industry's profit agendas. So parents must carefully weigh the risks associated with their actions in this context. (Personally, I would never recommend a parent call 911 on a "vaccine violence" doctor unless they first consult with an attorney and have a solid legal strategy in mind.)

If hundreds (or thousands) of parents do this across the state, it would bring the issue of vaccine violence to the surface, demanding a legal review of the practice of physically violating a person's body with a potentially harmful medical intervention in violation of medical ethics and medical consent. It might even result in the successful prosecution of a doctor for aggravated assault, sending an important message across the entire medical profession that you are not immune to the laws of the land. You may not commit acts of medical violence against children without simultaneously subjecting yourself to legal or civil consequences in a court of law.

Why SB 277 brings all this to the surface

When vaccines are optional, doctors injecting them are only engaged in a controversial "treatment." But when vaccines are coerced by the state, doctors are now colluding with a state-sponsored system of coercion that combines medical violence with the threat of denying a child their right to an education. Thus, the doctor is now playing a key role in the coercion / collusion which demands a child be physically violated with a harmful substance administered via what law enforcement already recognizes as a "dangerous weapon."

The doctor, in other words, is now a "co-conspirator" in the aggravated assault of the child. Under federal law, in fact, that doctor could technically be charged with conspiracy on top of the aggravated assault charge.

Suddenly, the doctor is in the position of carrying out an act of violence which is resisted by the parent. The context is now different: it's no longer "medical treatment" but rather "medical violence." Acts of violence against children are illegal under California law and federal law, opening up doctors to being charged, prosecuted and sentenced to prison for their role in the scheme.

Doctors may soon start requiring consent signatures from parents

For this reason, I now expect that many medical professionals in California who administer vaccines will begin requiring signatures on consent forms. This is their primary protection from being sued -- or potentially arrested -- if caught engaging in vaccine violence committed against a child.

Such "consent forms," interestingly, would have to include detailed descriptions of the potential side effects of vaccines in order to be recognized as valid. If the forms fail to provide the parent with full details of the vaccine side effects, the parent can rightfully claim they were not given "informed consent" and would therefore have a very strong civil liability case against the doctor.

SB 277 is what changes the context of all this. If it is signed into law, it will force parents who are adamantly opposed to vaccines to have their children vaccinated without their consent. These parents are rightly motivated to protect the health and lives of their children, which is why I predict we will see all the following taking place if SB 277 is signed into law:

1) Parents calling 911 on their doctors and demanding they be arrested for felony assault via vaccine violence.

2) Parents hiring lawyers to file civil lawsuits against pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens where vaccines are administered.

3) Parents of vaccine-injured children who were coerced into vaccination by SB 277 mounting new challenges under civil rights law. A case most likely to receive media attention and social media traction would involve an African-American child damaged by vaccines who was forced to be vaccinated due to SB 277. Under a properly-configured legal challenge, this family could sue the state of California, the clinic administering and vaccine and possibly even take a vaccine injury challenge back to the U.S. Supreme Court which might overturn its previous decision on Big Pharma's legal immunity. (The logic demands a review when the vaccines are now coerced rather than voluntary.)

In other words, if Gov. Jerry Brown signs SB 277 into law, he will unleash a "medical civil war" in California, involving protests from outraged parents and possibly even billions of dollars in medical liability on the state of California itself.

Sadly, the vaccine industry is so desperate to force compliance with its for-profit agenda that it will pull out all the stops to see this bill signed into law. Expect a medical civil war to erupt in California if Gov. Brown signs this, pitting doctors against patients... with law enforcement and civil rights attorneys thrown into the mix for good measure.

Source for this story include:
http://www.bolenreport.com/autism/antivaccin...
http://www.naturalnews.com/048819_vaccine_in...
http://www.naturalnews.com/049423_swine_flu_...
http://sb277.org
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resourc...
http://www.naturalnews.com/041345_cdc_polio_...
http://www.naturalnews.com/048863_vaccine_pr...
http://www.naturalnews.com/048519_vaccines_m...
http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines-manual/2011/2...
http://www.naturalnews.com/046630_CDC_whistl...
http://www.naturalnews.com/036385_GlaxoSmith...
http://www.naturalnews.com/036499_Glaxo_whis...
http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/...


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/049511_SB_277_vaccine_violence_medical_assault.html#ixzz3YdJnSJqX

Australia: Everyone Must Get Vaccinated, Except the Prime Minister's Daughters

by JON RAPPOPORT | INFOWARS | APRIL 27, 2015

21671740

---

We’re talking about Tony Abbott, who just ruled from on high that there are no more exemptions from vaccines in Australia.

No more conscientious objections, no more religious exemptions. Only the rare medical exemption, permitted by a doctor. And suddenly, every family who refuses vaccinations for their children will lose up to $15,000 per year, per child, in federal support money. Every family in Australia is eligible for federal money.

Tony has officially ripped away citizens’ right to choose. Australia is now officially a medical police state.

But…

Back in 2006, Tony was singing a very different tune concerning his own daughters.

On November 9, 2006, news.com.au had the story: “Abbott rules out cancer vaccine for his daughters” (see also theaustralian.com.au “I could be seen as ‘cruel’ on Gardasil: Abbott”):

“FEDERAL Health Minister [at the time] Tony Abbott has said that while he may be seen as a ‘cruel, callow, callous, heartless bastard’, he would not be rushing to have his own daughters vaccinated [with the HPV shot] against cervical cancer.

“‘I won’t be rushing out to get my daughters vaccinated, maybe that’s because I’m a cruel, callow, callous, heartless bastard but, look, I won’t be,’ Mr Abbott said on Southern Cross radio.”

How interesting. How revealing. Tony Abbott, a vaccine refuser. Then. But now he’s the Pope of forced vaccinations for all Australians, whether they want them or not.

I don’t see Australian media outlets rushing to cover this contradiction. A reader pointed me to the 2006 article. Otherwise I never would have known about Tony’s double life.

Back in 2006, Tony had a bizarre justification for his anti-vaccine stance. The news.com.auarticle spells it out:

Tony: “If there is a national immunisation program [that includes the HPV shot], I certainly will be making sure that they [his daughters] get vaccinated under the program.”

Tony: “The [national] program is what the experts think clearly is absolutely necessary, and at the moment the experts don’t think this [HPV shot] is absolutely necessary.”

The article continues:

“The PBAC [Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee] yesterday knocked back the application from Australian manufacturer CSL to make the Gardasil [HPV] vaccine available free to all females aged 12 to 26.

“Gardasil halts the spread of sexually-transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes 70 per cent of cervical cancers. At present it costs $460 for the recommended three doses.

“The PBAC said it made the decision because the vaccine program – which would have cost about $625 million during its first four years – was not value for money.”

Let me take this apart.

Tony was saying he wouldn’t have his daughters vaccinated with the HPV shot because there was no national program for it.

That’s like saying, “If the supermarket doesn’t sell cherries, I won’t let my daughters eat them.”

You see, the only reason a national program to vaccinate girls with the HPV shot wasn’t instituted, in 2006, was because of money. The cost vs. value of the program was determined to be “not worth it.”

Conventional researchers, doctors, and vaccine manufacturers in Australia were quite confident, in 2006, that the vaccine was safe and effective. Otherwise, they never would have considered it, in the first place, for the national vaccine program.

(As far I’m concerned, HPV is one of the most useless and dangerous vaccines in existence, but for the purposes of this argument, we’re talking about the conventional mainstream view.)

Tony was deciding to reject what he considered to be a safe and effective vaccine for his own daughters—for whatever bizarre reasons he cared to advance. Because he had the right to choose. And because he held a high post in government. And because he decided he could do whatever he wanted to do.

But now, flashing forward nine years, Tony is telling every person in Australia what they have to do. No choice. No freedom. No right to seek out information independently and make a decision based on that information.

Australia is a medical police state, with Tony, the old vaccine refuser, at the helm.

If that isn’t cause for uproar in the Land Down Under, what is?

“Hi, I’m Tony. I’m your boss, your ruler, your King. What I say goes. For you. But not necessarily for me. That’s the way it works, don’t you know? The King makes rules for everyone else, but he can do what he damn well pleases. He’s above the rules. He’s different. He’s the Lord of the idiots and slaves, but he himself is free. That’s the deal. It’s none of your business. Just keep your eyes straight ahead and your mouths shut and march forward. That’s your fate. I so command it.”

This post originally appeared at NoMoreFakeNews.com

VACCINE MANDATES ARE JUST CORPORATE STATUTES!!!

Parents Against Mandatory Vaccines

---

AND THEY ARE ABOUT PROFIT . . . NOT HEALTH!

The following is unknown by most health practitioners
and is denied by most attorneys!

FOUR INDISPUTABLE FACTS:

1) VACCINES CAUSE ILLNESS AND INJURIES AND NEITHER THE PUBLIC NOR HEALTH PRACTITIONERS HAVE BEEN TOLD THE TRUTH BY CDC INC!
In March 2011 an investigation by scientists exposed that the 'UK government' had been covering up the harmful effects of vaccines for the past 30 YEARS. Their study, "Health Hazards of Disease Prevention" was presented to the British Society for Ecological Medicine. It exposed that the UK 'government' " . . . made continuous efforts to withhold critical data on severe adverse reactions and contraindications to vaccinations from both parents and health practitioners in order to reach overall vaccination rates which they deemed were necessary for “herd immunity”, a concept which with regards to vaccination, and contrary to prevalent beliefs, does not rest on solid scientific evidence . . ." The same is true in the UNITED STATES.
* More info about the damaging health effects of vaccines at: International Medical Council on Vaccination
2) THE VACCINE INDUSTRY HAS BEEN GIVEN IMMUNITY FROM LAWSUITS
In 1986 vaccine manufactures and administers were given immunity from liability with the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act! And, the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System was established. Annually, it reports about 11,000 serious vaccine reactions, including up to 200 deaths and many more permanent disabilities. But, poor reporting in America suggests that annual adverse vaccine reactions, in fact, number from 100,000 - one million.

3) 'HEALTH AGENCIES', WHO PROMOTE VACCINES, ARE REALLY PRIVATE CORPORATIONS 'DOING BUSINESS'
Neither the Food and Drug Administration nor the Center for Disease Control answers to the American people or the health practitioners who provide medical care for the general population. We have nothing to say about who these so-called agencies hire, which researchers they consult or what policies they establish. They simply do not work for us!! These so-called institutions are listed as corporations on Dun and Bradstreet, therefore their first and foremost obligation is to their own "fiscal health", as is the case of all corporations.

4) VACCINE MANDATES ARE MERELY STATUTORY RULES OF STATE CORPORATIONS
All states have been incorporated for a long time. They are all listed in their corporate all caps names on Dun and Bradstreet. Example: the STATE OF OHIO - headquartered in COLUMBUS OH

Corporations cannot make laws for living men and women. Their employees can only make rules for their own entity. The way they implement their corporate rules on the people is through civil contracts.
* Go to: AntiCorruptionSociety.com - SOURCE DOCUMENTS - The Clearfield Doctrine
Our public schools who attempt to make vaccines a requirement for admission are also merely corporations listed on Dun and Bradstreet. Vaccine mandates are voted on by the STATE LEGISLATORS, who represent the STATE OF . . . .
* To view a table of this structure, go to Our Government is a Corporation.

As STATE LEGISLATORS (with no medical training) are being lobbied to revise state statutes to make it increasingly more difficult to opt out of mandatory vaccines, the vaccine-aware community needs a new approach. If the US Constitution and/or the Bill of Rights could protect us from mandatory vaccines, they would have stopped mandating them long ago. What we are now all experiencing is corporate statutory law (rules, regulations, fines, fees, etc) being enforced against the American population.
* Go to What is our Government . . . Really?

It is this corporate/statutory/contract legal (not lawful) system that must be exposed, defeated and abolished. And, don't look to any attorney to help us. This legal nightmare was created by them and it is 'they' who profit from it . . . at our expense!

NEGATING VACCINE STATUTES - A NEW APPROACH
To read about a new approach to protecting yourself and your family from the vaccine profiteers go to
• DO NOT SIGN the Refusal to Vaccinate Form
• Employee and Student Response to Vaccine Requirements

Miami Police Set to Launch Federally-Funded "Pre-Crime" System

“It goes beyond just looking at crime data"

by MIKAEL THALEN | INFOWARS.COM | APRIL 23, 2015

1500

---

The Miami Police Department is preparing to launch a new federally-funded software program aimed at stopping crime even before it occurs.

Purchased with the help of a $600,000 grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the “Hunchlab” predictive policing system will reportedly allow officers to “best forecast when and where crimes are likely to emerge.”

Utilizing years worth of local crime data, the program will use mathematical algorithms to create maps of areas likely to produce the most crime.

“It doesn’t replace actual police work,” Lt. Sean MacDonald told the Miami Herald. “It’s policing with smarter technology.”

Before its official launch, the city commission plans to award the Florida International University with a $120,000 contract in order to thoroughly test the program’s accuracy.

“It goes beyond just looking at crime data,” MacDonald added.

Police claim the software will be specifically used to focus in on crimes such as robbery, home burglary and auto theft, all major issues in the Miami-area.

Debate over such pre-crime programs has intensified in recent years as more and more departments acquire the technology. According to Lt. LeAnne Browning of the Los Angeles Police Department, a similar program known as PredPol has produced positive results.

“We all thought it was somewhat hocus pocus and Minority Report,” Browning said. “We could see if PredPol was predicting fairly well. It’s kind of scary, because they were.”

While some departments have discontinued the use of predictive-policing due to flawed results, civil liberties advocates point to more troublesome issues.

“How do you cross-examine a computer?” Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, a law professor at the University of the District of Columbia, asked. “To stop you and frisk you and search you, a police officer needs reasonable suspicion, so my question is how will this affect reasonable suspicion?”

PredPol representatives claim their program is not designed to target specific individuals.

“Since PredPol does not collect, upload, analyze or in any way involve any info about individuals or populations and their characteristics, it does not pose any profiling or personal privacy concerns,” Marketing Manager Ben Hoehn wrote.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/mt.examiner
Follow Mikael Thalen @ https://twitter.com/MikaelThalen

More Than 22,000 Brave Nurses Refusing to Submit to Mandatory Vaccinations

The Event Chronicle

Despite a CDC study that found mandatory vaccines for nurses offer no protection for patients, hospitals are pushing hard for forced vaccinations.  Many nurses are choosing to lose their jobs rather than submit to forced mandatory flu vaccinations, and one has even sued the hospital, state, and federal governments for $100,000,000.

(End All Disease) Nurses against Mandatory Vaccines (NAMV) was founded and formed by our CEO became alarmed when mandatory vaccination policies were being introduced into workplaces, and there seemed to be no rhyme or reason. First and foremost, NAMV is not anti-vaccine, but pro-choice when it comes to vaccination. We believe that all persons should have the right to choose and refuse medical treatment; that means nurses and healthcare workers alike.

Research and other publicly acquired information now shows why: hospital systems are REQUIRED to have a 90% or higher flu shot reception rate among their staff, or they lose up to 2% of their funding of Medicare/Medicaid (http://www.hhs.gov/ash/initiatives/hai/hcpflu.html). While the government itself does not require mandatory vaccination policies, many if not all, are taking an “all or nothing” stance against their workers. You now face being fired and without a job if you refuse a flu vaccine.

This is a human rights violation, is a violation of the Patient Bill of Rights, and is a huge EEOC violation.

The flu vaccine is not an effective way to eradicate a disease that is only ESTIMATED to cause approximately 30,000 deaths in the US per year. This number is lumped in with pneumonia cases. More people die each year from medical errors, heart disease, diabetes, and sepsis.

NAMV does not support mandatory vaccination policies for healthcare workers of any kind. We are here to stand up and fight back against this policy and procedure, and to fight back against the vaccine companies who clearly lobbied for this law ONLY to pad their own pockets. It has been suggested that the mandatory flu vaccines are for “patient safety.” The truth of the matter is, is that mandatory flu vaccine policies are to provide more funding and money for the vaccine companies who produce these drugs.

NAMV is here to fight and to help others fight against these unfair and unreasonable forced medical procedures.

Visit NAMV on Facebook

Nurses against mandatory vaccines.

This nurse took a 4 day suspension without pay for refusing the flu vaccine, then was forced to wear a mask when she returned to work.

Many of these nurses are required to wear masks from November 1 through March 31, all the while being harassed by doctors and co-workers.

Nurses against mandatory vaccines.

In spite of harassments for not compromising, these nurses keep a professional attitude and make the best of difficult circumstances for the sake of the patients.

Source: End All Disease