All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts, – Shakespeare, As You Like It,
Shakespeare titled his play, As You Like It, as if to say, you always have a choice. There is no law that compels anyone to do anything related to mandated restrictions. The freedom to choose is non-negotiable. You always have options just like you have opinions.
However, in this era, freedom must be defended and claimed as a birthright.
Because governments have inverted and overturned the basic principle of choice, by way of Acts, they have bound freedom, itself, to a contract.
All government Acts apply to government entities and persons; not to men and women. Men and women are not subject to Acts, because they are not subjects.
It’s All an Act!
From The NICE Act, (HR 5816), introduced as a Health Freedom bill in 2022, [and failed], to the FDA Modernization Act 2.0, it’s ALL an Act!
The new law amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by authorizing sponsors of novel drugs to make use of “certain alternatives to animal testing, including cell-based assays and computer models, to obtain an exemption from the Food and Drug Administration to investigate the safety and effectiveness of a drug.—FDA Modernization Act 2.0
The FDA gives itself permission to transition from testing animal models to directly testing humans. This theme is seen in the recent RFK Jr. Act. being introduced in NYC to strengthen vaccine reporting requirements. Providers would be required to report when they administer a vaccine to an adult, unless the patient opts out.
Flip-Flopping Politics
The NYC bill, like the media, has made RFK Jr. out to be a vaccine skeptic. The media narrative suggests that Kennedy is anti-vaccine.
However, this narrative goes against Kennedy’s own words. Here, Kennedy sets the record straight that he is and always has been, pro-vaccine. “I am not anti-vaccine,” says Kennedy. Recall, his father, John F. Kennedy introduced the Vaccine Assistance Act in 1962.
The question is: do people believe the words an individual speaks or not? Can someone play both sides effectively?
Politics is an Act. Words of politicians are meant to cause confusion so no one ever really knows what is going on. First, the flavor of the day appears to be anti-vaccine. Another day it is anti-vaccine no more!
In 2018, RFK Jr. brought a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regarding vaccine safety that resulted in no formal actions against the DHHA.
The lawsuit proved that the DHHS failed to submit a single biannual report to Congress detailing the improvements in vaccine safety, as required by The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, in exchange for allowing vaccine makers immunity from injuries and deaths from their products.
What does that mean? It means RFK Jr. is either a) an ineffective attorney, b) a wolf in sheep’s clothing, c) a showman, d) all of the above.
Kennedy has a role to play. As the new head of DHHS, why doesn’t RFK Jr. simply do away with the DHHS as an ineffective, wasteful government agency?
Could it be because he is now the main actor on the DHHS stage? Was the lawsuit a prequel for his final act to trigger safety testing for all? Is RFK Jr’s character completing a story arc in coming full circle?
The “pro-anti” debate format is designed to confuse. Saying “I am not anti-vaccine” is a double negative, meant to cause confusion, as it seems to have accomplished among his followers. It’s the logic of testifying: “Not guilty” instead of “Innocent.”
Causing Confusion
Kennedy says that vaccine advisors are beholden to industry. But, Kennedy, himself, is now a vaccine advisor.
He says the measles vaccine routinely causes deaths. But he also says he will not take anyone’s vaccines away. In his attempts to “clarify” his stance, he muddies the waters.
There is no vaccine that is safe and effective for everyone. — RFK Jr.
One day he says, getting the measles is better than getting the measles vaccine (because he knows the infection provides lifelong protection). Another day he says “getting the MMR is the most effective way to prevent the spread of measles.” In fact, he urges people to get the jab.
When the goalposts keep shifting, people are left flummoxed, perplexed, and looking to authority for their answers. Despite their own opinions, individuals sublimate their voice to another voice who speaks for them.
Note: RFK Jr. is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, who rescinded the current policy of requiring new rules and regulations to be open to public comment before they are implemented by the agency.
Safety-Testing
Kennedy has always questioned the safety of vaccines. He has repeatedly asked to see “data” or “science” showing vaccines are safe. Why? because there are no real studies showing safety with vaccines. So he has proposed safety-testing vaccines.
But how does one safety-test toxins, especially the new mRNA technology that works with 6G and 7G wireless, called Optogenetics? Isn’t this a situation for the Precautionary Principle to come into play?
The precautionary principle asserts that the burden of proof for potentially harmful actions by industry or government rests on the assurance of safety and that when there are threats of serious damage, scientific uncertainty must be resolved in favor of prevention.
In today’s world the “precautionary principle” would be seen as anti-science. In his own words, RFK Jr. shares his positions at the University of Colorado in 2019:
My position is not anti-science. My positioning is exactly aligned with the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine. People don’t know my position because people call me an anti-vaxxer but I’m not. I’m pro-vaccine. I had all my children vaccinated. I believe vaccines should be tested, safety tested. —RFK Jr. 2019
For the promotion of science, just who will be the subjects of these tests? Children? Adults? Everyone? Has not this been the case since the first vaccine study was conducted in 1889 by Alfred Wallace? This study, using government data comparing vaccinated and non-vaccinated people, should have been the vaccine study to end all studies.
One article asks, Will RFK Jr.’s vaccine agenda make Americans contagious again? In other words, is this all for show, by design, to serve a purpose to push vaccines for all? Is a narrative being formed to cause fear?
Fears are rising that infectious diseases such as measles could make a comeback now that the anti-vaccine advocate is in charge of the US public-health system.
There is no such thing as a safe vaccine. So, as a vaccine advisor, is RFK Jr. there to promote pharmaceutical companies?
Related articles:
Leave A Comment