Now you won't be able to fly without the jab

[The Gleam]

Then I won't fly. I am never getting the shot.

My car has a wing on it.

I'm just flying at low altitude.

[bigmike82]

No.

'Entering the hospital' as a patient is a very different situation than visiting someone at the hospital. You will be able to get treatment with no issues even without taking the incredibly safe Covid vaccine. Kaiser will not turn you away.

[The Gleam]

interesting read on vaccine hesitancy

This is all going to play out until for another few months, when you'll see a reversal of a call for vaccine mandates, once this underlying current of seemingly forbidden research exposing the inefficiency and unsafe aspect of these pseudo-vaccines, whereby multiple streams of this doubt that are brewing converge, and collectively diffuse the fascist push of these pseudo-vaccines.

The politicians pushing numbers over quality, and their media-concubines, have done well to silence, squelch, dismiss, and censor the whistleblowers; but it's coming to a head.

The slow but sure exposure that the the pseudo-vaccines are causing organ damage, clotting, inflammation, and later - further investigation of these issues potentially revealing they evolve into to irreversible clotting, meningitis, renal-failure, brain-damage, fibrosis/cirrhosis - and the tune will change.

You'll never lose the mask mandates of course, because they are growing less confident of the pseudo-vaccines as well. But if they can get everyone to mask, and continue enforce shut-downs/lock-downs/social-distancing which will surely slow the spread of COVID to a degree, they can use that to claim the pseudo-vaccines are working - and it's the unvaccinated that continue to cultivate, incubate, and propagate the variants.

Yet at some point, likely soon, serious consequences of the pseudo-vaccines will finally be confirmed, Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and Astrazenca will be forced to reveal and admit the dangers of the untested pseudo-vaccines, and then politicians will the clamor and claw at their vocabulary to try to take a different route to look like heroes.

They'll come out expressing how they really doubted the vaccines all along, and point to quips they made out of contexts in attempt to show they were 'moderate' even against vaccine mandates all long.

Until that time, it's going to be very dicey, very edgy, without a lot of apprehensiveness caused by those who will seek to shame, castigate and chastise those who harbor resolution to not put this Frankenstein bunk in their body, at any cost.

Time will prove the latter the wiser, it's just unfortunate it could take as long as 2 years (or more) to get there - but even 2 months away at this point seems like an eternity.

-----

[The Gleam]

No.

'Entering the hospital' as a patient is a very different situation than visiting someone at the hospital. You will be able to get treatment with no issues even without taking the incredibly safe Covid vaccine. Kaiser will not turn you away.

Today, maybe.

And in the future? It will be 'vaccinate at the door' to enter, for non-emergency needs.

And you know that; such a utility mandate is already being discussed in the health-phobic cities, by the well-known hypochondriac politicians like Garcetti, Breed, Durkan, Lightfoot, Bowser, and de Blasio, along with their respective city councils.

[bigmike82]

Today, maybe.

And in the future? It will be 'vaccinate at the door' to enter, for non-emergency needs.

And you know that; such a utility mandate is already being discussed in the health-phobic cities, by the well-known hypochondriac politicians like Garcetti, Breed, Durkan, Lightfoot, Bowser, and de Blasio, along with their respective city councils.

No. That is utter nonsense. Hospitals can not turn away patients who need treatment urgently. There is zero precedent for requiring patients to have vaccinations in order to get treatment.

[The Gleam]

No. That is utter nonsense. Hospitals can not turn away patients who need treatment urgently. There is zero precedent for requiring patients to have vaccinations in order to get treatment.

No it's not and you know it; it may have been before, but it's absolutely being positioned right now by the very people and cities I cited. To deny that is disingenuous on your part.

Further, you said "need treatment urgently." I did not say that, and you're coyly mixing in minced words to add an element that wasn't there before to bolster your position - which IS nonsense, even more of your double-speak entendre theater.

This utter nonsense you are denying IS being pitched by various politicians who are taking great pride in the ideology; to enter a hospital, you either will need to be vaccinated, or you can opt to get vaccinated at the door. I even sated, no, not for the ER, but for all other non-urgent treatment, it will be absolutely an essential if they can get their way.

That is absolutely on the docket, these are very different times, and it's incredibly daft for you to pretend that is NOT a potential utility they are pondering.

It's their words; not mine.

[meno377]

No it's not and you know it; it may have been before, but it's absolutely being positioned right now by the very people and cities I cited. To deny that is disingenuous on your part.

Further, you said "need treatment urgently." I did not say that, and you're coyly mixing in minced words to add an element that wasn't there before to bolster your position - which IS nonsense, even more of your double-speak entendre theater.

This utter nonsense you are denying IS being pitched by various politicians who are taking great pride in the ideology; to enter a hospital, you either will need to be vaccinated, or you can opt to get vaccinated at the door. I even sated, no, not for the ER, but for all other non-urgent treatment, it will be absolutely an essential if they can get their way.

That is absolutely on the docket, these are very different times, and it's incredibly daft for you to pretend that is NOT a potential utility they are pondering.

It's their words; not mine.

I absolutely agree with you regarding our crazy politicians looking to pass these restrictions, but I also believe most of them actually won't pass. As a visitor? Probably. As a patient including a doctor's visit I would find that hard to get away with without major pushback.

[The Gleam]

I absolutely agree with you regarding our crazy politicians looking to pass these restrictions, but I also believe most of them actually won't pass. As a visitor? Probably. As a patient including a doctor's visit I would find that hard to get away with without major pushback.

Find it hard - agree. Now. As we think it today.

Just watch how they go full Gestapo with the petty-authority, using need and life-essentials as the carrot to administer pseudo-vaccinations.

Fascinating that anyone in California would not see this as highly possible, considering all the things they have done, and are talking about continuing to do, to separate you from your civil-right of the 2nd Amendment.

That was just a lead-in, the opening act, the Litmus; if they were able to do it there, the arrogance they earned, and the ease of implementation by which they could do it - in a state with a super-majority - all with the fawning NeoSocialist media on their side to push it, I truly think they feel there is no stopping them.

Further, I do believe most all health-care facilities would readily welcome such legislation and play along.

[bigmike82]

No it's not and you know it; it may have been before, but it's absolutely being positioned right now by the very people and cities I cited. To deny that is disingenuous on your part.

Further, you said "need treatment urgently." I did not say that, and you're coyly mixing in minced words to add an element that wasn't there before to bolster your position - which IS nonsense, even more of your double-speak entendre theater.

This utter nonsense you are denying IS being pitched by various politicians who are taking great pride in the ideology; to enter a hospital, you either will need to be vaccinated, or you can opt to get vaccinated at the door. I even sated, no, not for the ER, but for all other non-urgent treatment, it will be absolutely an essential if they can get their way.

That is absolutely on the docket, these are very different times, and it's incredibly daft for you to pretend that is NOT a potential utility they are pondering.

It's their words; not mine.

Stop it.

If you require medical treatment at Kaiser, you WILL get medical treatment at Kaiser. Period. End of story. It doesn't matter what your vac status is.

[meno377]

Find it hard - agree. Now. As we think it today.

Just watch how they go full Gestapo with the petty-authority, using need and life-essentials as the carrot to administer pseudo-vaccinations.

Fascinating that anyone in California would not see this as highly possible, considering all the things they have done, and are talking about continuing to do, to separate you from your civil-right of the 2nd Amendment.

That was just a lead-in, the opening act, the Litmus; if they were able to do it there, the arrogance they earned, and the ease of implementation by which they could do it - in a state with a super-majority - all with the fawning NeoSocialist media on their side to push it, I truly think they feel there is no stopping them.

Further, I do believe most all health-care facilities would readily welcome such legislation and play along.

Absolutely because Universal Healthcare has been a major agenda since the Clintons and if any state is pushing for that, it's California.

[The Gleam]

Stop it.

If you require medical treatment at Kaiser, you WILL get medical treatment at Kaiser. Period. End of story. It doesn't matter what your vac status is.

Stop being off-topic, unless you're trying to espouse "end of story" as an anemic means again to change what is being discussed to fit your irrelevant position by trying to lasso the conversation to what is as it is TODAY, as you argue it - for today - and not looking at the future as those who are controlling the means are planning for tomorrow; which is in writing, and genuinely their very words.

Your proposition is for today, alone, maybe for tomorrow, and for some small time. True.

But that's NOT the discussion at hand, and for what I've made clear - is what is being planned, contemplated, pitched by politicians AND the corporations and their admins that run such hospitals, which is currently one of "can we do this".

And that is what and where we are up against. It would be no different than coming here on Calguns in preparation of strategy to fight a lousy, proposed Anti-2nd Amendment legislative piece.

And we all know how well that has gone over the last several years.

So, just what is it that YOU want to stop?

This discussion of strategy about how to approach this potential situation and scenario that could arise as soon as LA City Council and those of its ilk in other cities and state level so choose to pursue it?

No different than I see how you repeatedly wish or would like to see all discussion of the SCIENCE from the same sources and outlets you like to cite as propping up these pseudo-vaccines as 100% safe/100% efficacy- that cite there are problems, legitimized by the CDC, WHO, various medical research centers, peer review, and universities that there ARE problems and further investigation is needed?

You want to "just stop it" when things don't fit your fabricated narrative?

Sounds like censorship to me. You repeatedly go off-topic to make it look like you are the topic genesis divinator, so as to appear pious, but it's merely a diversionary tactic on your part.

Do try to stay on topic, do try to keep up.

[subscriber]

vaccination status is not about immunity

The video below explains that vaccine trial placebo recipients will be deemed to have vaccinated immunity, with respect to their travel passes. And, that the UK govt will get that immunity status extended for travel to other countries.

Let that soak in. If the placebo, that does nothing, is equal to the vaccine for travel purposes, then vaccination status is not about immunity. It is about conformity; and obedience to taking the needle. Placebo recipients don't know if they got the real vaccine or not; and apparently that does not actually matter. They are not considered potential super spreaders, because they took the needle; despite not having developed any immunity from their "shot".

If the "authorities" care about actual immunity, they would acknowledge that a very large percentage of the population already has naturally acquired immunity. They would accept a positive antibody test in lieu of taking the vaccine. But no, you must submit to their needle, or you are not worthy of moving about freely. That is, moving freely, until they declare that the vaccine that works so well, no longer does. That you will need another vaccine; and that won't be available for another 6 months. So, best mask up and shut down the economy; again.

A virus cannot be so virulent that is has spreads to hundreds of millions of people, yet not also produce hundreds of millions with natural immunity. Who has natural immunity? Everyone who caught covid-19 already, and has fully recovered from it.

If this does not give you pause, I am not sure what will...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmhvA-DmXYg

[a1fabweld]

I’ve already made peace with the fact that I may never be able to travel to other countries or take cruises due to the almost inevitable travel restrictions. I’m ok with that. This is a huge country and I’ve barely seen any of it. Road trips to visit other states and see the countryside along the way is fine with me from here on out.

[707electrician]

No. That is utter nonsense. Hospitals can not turn away patients who need treatment urgently. There is zero precedent for requiring patients to have vaccinations in order to get treatment.

There is also zero precedent for requiring visitors of patients to have vaccinations in order to enter the hospital

[Dirtlaw]

No. That is utter nonsense. Hospitals can not turn away patients who need treatment urgently. There is zero precedent for requiring patients to have vaccinations in order to get treatment.

Zero precedent? Seems to me that these days the government is doing a lot of things that are without precedent. I don't think they really care about precedent ... or the Constitution for that matter.