Boston Herald calls for government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER naturopaths, scientists and journalists who oppose mercury in immunizations
From the Boston Heralds editorial staff.
It’s one thing for Hollywood celebrities to wear their anti-vaccine pride like just another fashion trend. It’s another thing when anti-vaccine activists start preying on vulnerable people, particularly within immigrant communities.
Yes, the anti-vaxxers appear to be plying their trade with the Somali community in Minnesota — and the result, sadly, is a dangerous outbreak of measles.
The recent outbreak is now up to 41 kids, all of them under 10. The Washington Post reported Friday that the number of children of Somali descent in Minnesota who have received the vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) plunged from 92 percent in 2004 to 42 percent in 2014 — not nearly enough to immunize against those diseases.
Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).
But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.
These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/e...
It’s one thing for Hollywood celebrities to wear their anti-vaccine pride like just another fashion trend. It’s another thing when anti-vaccine activists start preying on vulnerable people, particularly within immigrant communities.
Yes, the anti-vaxxers appear to be plying their trade with the Somali community in Minnesota — and the result, sadly, is a dangerous outbreak of measles.
The recent outbreak is now up to 41 kids, all of them under 10. The Washington Post reported Friday that the number of children of Somali descent in Minnesota who have received the vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) plunged from 92 percent in 2004 to 42 percent in 2014 — not nearly enough to immunize against those diseases.
Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).
But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.
These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/e...
Now why do our modern medical practices have to use mercury if it affects the brain? Does it affect only a small enough percentage of individuals that's it's worth it?
The doctors generally cite the studies and the hassle of obtaining vaccines without the thimerosal. Such vaccines are produced, but they are not readily available in all areas. I believe California now requires that vaccines without thimersal be available for parents who request it for their children. I would recommend such a request. Also, vaccinations should be spaced out so children are not hit with multiple doses all at once. If your doctor doesn't know if the vaccinations contain thimerosal or not, assume they do. If your doctor won't administer vaccines without thimerosal, get another doctor. Doctors have not been blameless in all this, but denial runs deep.
Some very good information put forth and sage advice.
Our Constitution makes the betrayal exceedingly vile. They no only undermine the system but corrode the public trust in self governance. Treason.
Protecting Disney's copyright, no matter how reprehensible, is NOT a treasonous act. Incidentally, Mickey Mouse is actually in the public domain: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!top...
I could argue that "Adhering to their enemies" would apply to politicians.
Adhering - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder.
Alliances, philosophical, which are acting on by politicians and go against the Constitution, violating their oaths of office, could be considered treason. Frankly, I wish it would. We'd get a lot less anti-Americans in office.
Why keep "embarrassing" your self.
The hysteria includes misrepresenting the Herald. All of it is an embarrassment to the forum. And now we see another conservative trying to morally intimidate us into going along with his misrepresentation of the Constitution because on the authority of claiming to be a "veteran". Rejecting that is not an "embarrassment".
It's good that most thimerosal has been taken out of most vaccines now (it hasn't all been removed; it is still present in the lfu vaccine multi-dose vials, and in smaller amounts in children's vaccines) -- however, the aluminum adjuvants which remain in many shots are a cause for concern.
Here are some articles on aluminum in vaccines: https://www.askdrsears.com/topics/hea...
http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/201...
http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/201...
https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2015/11/...
To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the physician’s oath, but to nobody else.
I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even, verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.
Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, and I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm, especially from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets.
Now if I carry out this oath, and break it not, may I gain for ever reputation among all men for my life and for my art; but if I transgress it and forswear myself, may the opposite befall me.[5]
The Boston Herald, which happens to be a conservative newspaper, not the "left", obviously concluded with the phrase "ought to be a hanging offense" as a metaphor to emphasize the seriousness of the phobia it denounced. Even in states with the death penalty for murder, "hanging" is no longer used, which ought to serve as a clue to those incapable of figuring it out on their own.
The editorial was a well-reasoned article that did not advocate "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER" anyone, which misrepresentation is hysterical stupidity beneath the level of the sensationalist National Enquirer -- as is the entire "world's top news source on natural health" linked to as a 'source' that is no better than the anti-medical science "Christian Science" sect.
Please stop embarrassing "Galts Gulch Online" with this nonsense.
Got a question about Objectivism? Ayn Rand? Politics? Life? Dinner? Or... anything else for that matter. The Gulch wants to hear it. Ask away.
The hysteria? Kind of like your post
Leftist (illegal?) anti-Trump immigrant threatens mass "casualties" (townhall.com)
Posted by ewv 6 months, 1 week ago to Politics
3 comments | Save | Ignore
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/e...
The Herald editorial concluded, as has been explained previously, with the phrase "ought to be a hanging offense" as a metaphor to emphasize the seriousness of the dangerous fad phobia it denounced. No sensible person believes anyone is advocating "hanging". Even in states with the death penalty for murder "hanging" is no longer used, which ought to serve as a clue to those incapable of figuring it out on their own, and it never did involve "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER".
The Herald did not did not advocate "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER" and anyone can see that and the rest of the hysteria in this thread. Instead of acknowledging that you are defensively trying to turn it into a personal feud.
When I write, the Obamanation should be tried for treason (for a list of things!) and face what used to (Eddie Slovak/the Rosenbergs) come with that sort of a magnitude, I mean it.
Should I ever write something is a hanging offense, I will most certainly mean it.
The Herald did not did not say it advocates "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER" and obviously does not want to "hang" people, despite the desperate attempts to misrepresent the clear meaning of the editorial. There is no excuse for the hysterical misrepresentation. Perhaps if the Herald editors had believed that their readers were too obtuse to understand the editorial they would have worded it differently, but beyond the fringes nothing helps. Sometimes obtuseness is deliberate.
The same clowns hysterically misrepresenting people on behalf of their emotional anti-science "cause" here are on a rage 'downvoting' the facts here in a fit of further lashing out. They lack objectivity, to say the least.
Glad you like my writing style.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBjk...
Don't give them an inch. Don't ignore or tolerate any "--ought to be a hanging offense" or any "--ought to go to jail" either.
There are a lot of threats too dangerous to ignore, but not the ones made up like hysterical inflammatory false accusations of a newspaper claimed to advocate "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER". That only serves to discredit those associated with it. Any sensible person attracted to Ayn Rand and coming here for more information who sees that as representative will only go off in another direction, writing off Ayn Rand supporters as another group of kooks.
Nevertheless, people on all sides just plain need to stop making insinuations that can be perceived as threats unless they are saying what they mean.
That "hard core cadre of ideological leftists" being globalists definitely wants to see rest of the world obediently on their knees, imprisoned or dead. Whatever that editorial meant about about "a hanging offense," I'm certain leftists who read that just loved envisioning such in their evil indoctrinated sick heads.
In this climate, the Boston Herald would have far been better off ending that editorial with something like "--ought to be marginalized as silly Chicken Littles" instead of anything that remotely suggested the stretching of necks, jailing or punishment in any form or fashion.
So methinks someone needs to yell, "Hey, don't write that kinda crap!"
Wakefield's a good man. He's certainly not a liar. Listen to his speeches yourself and REALLY focus on the words. What has been reported on him is so far off that it'd be laughable if he weren't such a good guy.
Further note that the second of the three doctors who fought the judgment that the article represented professional misconduct (Prof. John Walker-Smith, the supervisor who approved and oversaw the children's treatment and the publication of article) ultimately won and was cleared of any wrongdoing: http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/brit...
If you listen to Dr. Wakefield speak, I think you'll find him to be a very intelligent, caring, and skilled doctor. He strikes me as similar to an Ayn Rand character: a talented, productive person who has been unfairly persecuted by corrupt government officials. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6DuB...
If your curiosity has been whetted and you want to know more about Wakefield's perspective through this ordeal, his autobiographical book Callous Disregard is enlightening: http://www.callous-disregard.com/
I'll answer that with another question.
Why did I stock up on guns and ammo when I thought a corrupt socialist Evil Hag would be my POTUS?
Evil Hag is the name given to my modified AR15 looking 9mm carbine with two 30-round clips.
Do you have any links to the threats or news articles.
― Stephen Hawking
How does the term "hanging offense" fit in here, my fellow Objectivists?
Leave people alone.
So I'm having trouble understanding how it could wind up in my email this morning.
Or perhaps it just goes to show I'm too obtuse to give a happy damn what you think.
Whatever. I no longer care.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeRDB...
If you don't care about the anti-vaxxer's hysterical lying then don't read the posts about it.
I'll ignore that rant at the end.
You see, when I'm called names, it pulls an off switch in my little dino head.
It's something I picked up from working 21 years at a state prison.
Well, bye.
Say, why don't you think up another fancy word for calling me stupid and see if I have any use for you?
The rest of the anti-vaccine hysteria is no better than that misrepresentation of the Herald.
Do we not have a First Amendment right to voice unpopular opinions without fear of government interference and punishment (not to mention a pre-existing natural right to the same)? This rag is advocating government violation of the Constitution - punishing speech with death - and you're defending it. Maybe it was just a joke, or an exaggeration for effect, but I don't find it funny. I find it sinister. Especially considering it's the second time a paper has published this view.
The intent of the editorial board is clear. The state science institute has determined what risk to your child is appropriate for the greater good. The editors are indicating how we all should think about it.
The editors understand that billions of lives have been saved by modern preventative medicine, including billions of individual children, despite occasional side effects that occur in all medicine. It isn't a plot to "risk your child for the greater good" versus the false alternative of Christian Science abandonment of medical science.
Every editorial "indicates" what the writers would like people to think -- that is what editorials are for, as is most writing. It is not a conspiracy for thought control to stop people from realizing that "alien Vaccines are coming for us", cynically suppressing The Truth with "execution squads".
The campus minister at the college I went to once said, "if the Jews weren't persecuted they would lose their identity". Religions have their own identities with or without their cycles of mutual persecution, but despite the inter-religious warfare of his antisemitism, he certainly captured the nature of a common fringe mentality.
Anyone can see how stupid this is, but this nonsense should not be taken seriously or condoned in any way on an Ayn Rand forum where people come to find out more about Ayn Rand's ideas and may not know any better about her and the intellectual movement she started -- which has nothing to do with paranoia, conspiracy theories, emotional outbursts, anarchy or the rest of the junk that we find promoted here.
The rhetoric gets more violent and it encourages the protesters to become more violent. The tipping point will come when the victims
( individuals) fight back.
The brief editorial, which is not a research article requiring citations, does not call "for government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER naturopaths, scientists and journalists who oppose mercury in immunizations" or the rest of the hysterical accusations in this thread, and the editors are not "Eliz.Warren dolts".
You can do what you like regarding even the tiniest amounts of Mercury, and all medical procedures entail risk. The hysteria in this thread and in the "natural news" it linked to are not science or even rational discussion.
If you don't know then why did you write that about the Herald? By the way, syndicated radio talk-show host Howie Carr writes a column for it, and the famous economist Warren Brookes got his start there and wrote many excellent columns there for years. It's one of the few publications sympathetic with keeping taxes down.
As for the "posted article" you referred to, I don't know which article you mean. The Herald editorial denouncing the anti-vaccine fad (and the Hollywood celebrities) or the "natural news" hysteria linked to.
Howie Carr is well known in New England. Warren Brooks died prematurely in the 1990s, but is still remembered. One of the last series he published in the Herald was an excellent series of articles on property rights, including exposing the anti-private property rights corruption of The Nature Conservancy nationally and a major US Fish & Wildlife Service/land trust hit job against a private landowner in Maine. I talked to him several times when I was first starting out in this battle, providing him with a lot of good written documentation that he used very well. It's a shame we lost him shortly after that.
The recent Herald editorial on the anti-vaccine fad was very brief, and as an editorial was of course opinion but not dishonestly manipulative like so much is. It wasn't controversial with much of anyone other than a few perpetually frenzied kooks out of the region like the Natural News website. It didn't otherwise generate a backlash and would not have no matter what side it was published from.
Being for or against vaccines and modern medical technology is not particularly conservative or liberal, but does show up as one of the stock emotional movement outbursts. Taking a flaky anti-vaccine position got conservative Michelle Bachmann in a lot of trouble, embarrassing and discrediting her politically.
Ironically, Warren Brooks died of simple pneumonia because he was a follower of Christian Scientists and refused medical treatment that would have saved him.
The whole thread was based on a hysterical false incendiary accusation lifted from a kook website that its proponents still refuse to acknowledge. I don't expect to get through to those who choose to act like that. No one can because everyone must decide for himself whether to be rational and learn enough to understand what that requires.
But anyone can see what they are doing, including the frenzied "downvotes" of simple statements of fact, the emotional, evasive "responses" and further slinging of accusations, and that this is rejected by rational people. They're destroying their own credibility by continuing like this but hopefully not the integrity of the forum.
We can only hope that others not so familiar with Ayn Rand can realize that her ideas are not compatible with such activist promotions and hysteria from the fads of anarchists, anti-vaxxers, Birthers, Birchers, Con-cons, Ron Paulers, Trump idolatry, Truthers, or whatever else that mentality starts pushing.
Look in the mirror to find the guilty, Boston Herald.
imo, he does see it and states it, boldly believing that people are too stupid to recognize it.
Rather than get into things that won't be resolved in this medium I'll say that when you look at topics like this, go with Objectivism. What would an Objectivist say about hanging people who don't agree? What would an Objectivist say about forced medical treatment? What might Ayn Rand say about studies being done in "science institutes" on products when the manufacturers are paying for those studies? Don't waste your efforts trying to answer me here. Ask yourself.
Ayn Rand strongly supported science, and for that reason opposed 'state science institutes' as well as forcing companies to support them. She did not oppose vaccination and supported quarantines for those who would spread a communicable disease without them. She did not support conspiracy theories.
And, that is what we're talking about here. Kill. Break up families. Hang. Maim.
Now imagine that he has the power to establish the tuning standard of all musical instruments throughout the Western World.
Imagine that he bases the entire scale of musical artistic creation upon a frequency which would skew vibrations towards discord.
It sounds like science fiction. Yet this is exactly what transpired in September 1939 when Rockefeller (Illuminati) financial interests dictated that the standard tuning for the note of "A" above middle C would henceforth be said to vibrate at precisely 440 cycles per second.
This unnatural standard tuning frequency, removed from the symmetry of sacred vibrations and overtones, has declared war on the subconscious mind of Western Man.
The standard tuning fork, which is set to vibrate the note "A" above middle C at 440 cycles per second, is based upon a frequency only divisible by two rather than three, which means that all of the musical notes both above and below it are affected.
Despite the apparent "sweet music" a symphony orchestra can produce, when all instruments are tuned based on the A=440Hz key frequency, they are covert weapons no matter what "music" they may be playing.
These destructive frequencies entrain the thoughts towards disruption, disharmony, disunity. Additionally, they also stimulate the controlling organ of the body -- the brain -- into disharmonious resonance, which ultimately creates disease and war. - See more at: https://www.henrymakow.com/musicalsca...
"Despite such confusion, A = 440 Hz is the only official standard and is widely used around the world. Many orchestras in the United Kingdom adhere to this standard as concert pitch.[15] In the United States some orchestras use A = 440 Hz, while others, such as the New York Philharmonic use A = 442 Hz.[16] The latter is also often used as a tuning frequency in Europe,[3] especially in Denmark, France, Hungary, Italy, Norway and Switzerland.[17] Nearly all modern symphony orchestras in Germany and Austria and many in other countries in continental Europe (such as Russia, Sweden and Spain) tune to A = 443 Hz.[15][17]The Boston Symphony Orchestra tunes to A = 441 Hz." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concert...
In Europe prior to the twentieth century, pitch varied widely from place to place and from century to century. How widely, and how erratically, is evident from studies of organs (either historic instruments that had not been modified when tests were made, or replicas of historic instruments), early treatises that mention pitch, and historic tuning forks, To take Germany prior to 1600 as an example, organ pitch there is thought to have varied from a high of A=567 Hz for the first simple pipe organs of the Middle Ages to a low of A=377 Hz for the early modern German organ around 1511.1 But not even at one particular time in one region of a country was standardization deemed necessary. It seems that composers and performers were accustomed to taking local variations in the tuning of organs and other keyboard instruments into account, either by writing a score in more than one key, or by transposing at sight – thereby accommodating the fixed pitch ranges of other instruments and the singers in the ensemble.Difficulties were naturally increased as scores and musicians traveled further. Two eighteenth-century international musicians, Handel and Mozart, are known to have favoured specific pitch levels — (again expressed in modern terms) A=423 Hz in the case of Handel and A=422 Hz in the case of Mozart, i.e. approximately one-half semitone lower than A=440 Hz.3The nineteenth century saw a trend in Europe and North American toward the inexorable raising of the pitch level of instruments in performances. Alexander Ellis attributed this to two nineteenth-century developments: larger venues, and new developments in instrument making. As compared to Haydn or Mozart’s day, public concerts in the nineteenth century were played before larger audiences, often in concert halls and opera houses larger than existed in previous times. These large rooms could accommodate – even required – high, brilliant pitches at climaxes, effects that could be achieved when playing eighteenth-century scores by employing instruments pitched higher than those that had performed the same scores in smaller rooms. For reasons such as this, nineteenth-century makers of wind instrument for band and orchestra sought to garner a niche in the market by developing and selling instruments pitched slightly higher so as to sound more brilliant than the competition’s. Meanwhile, improvements to the strings of stringed instruments meant that these could be stretched tighter, i.e., tuned higher, to match the tuning of the newly acquired wind instruments of, say, an opera house.most of history there were varying customary pitches employed depending on the musical style of the times, but a truly organized, accepted “gold standard” did not exist. In the mid-20th century this all changed. In 1939, Reich Master of Propaganda in Nazi Germany Joseph Goebbels was the first to push for the 440 Hz pitch to be standardized internationally– he succeeded in doing so only within Germany and, briefly, in England.
Prior to this, the American music industry had reached an informal standard of 440 Hz in 1926 for instrument manufacturing. In 1936, the American Standards Association recommended that the A above middle C be tuned to 440 Hz. This standard was taken up by the International Organization for Standardization in 1955. Although still not universally accepted, it has served since then as the audio frequency reference for the calibration of acoustic equipment and the tuning of pianos, violins, and other musical instruments. [2]
Prominent musician and manufacturer J.C. Deagan, who also campaigned for the 440 Hz standard, designed the 440 Hz-based war chimes that were used for World war II propaganda news reels. Interestingly, these same chimes are also used in the call signs for the NBC television network.
It should be noted that there exists an infinite number of frequencies out there — some see the standardization of 440 Hz as simply arbitrary, whereas others feel it’s downright sinister. Why attach so much animosity to a number? The answer lies in the work of two music-related scientific fields: Cymatics and psychoacoustics. Cymatics is the study of sound and vibration as they pertain to the physical plane.
I will also point out that other languages such as Russian have singular, dual, and plural whereas we have only singular and plural. Does that cause you to be discordant? Some languages have three genders: male, female, neuter. Others have four, one with no gender at, not neuter. But Hebrew has only two: Male and Female. Thus, their god Yahweh was male, when, theologically, capital-G God should probably be without sex or gender. Are Jews naturally discordant because they have only two genders, not three?
The 440 Hz... Thanks again for the "high, bright, and loud" explanation. I point out that no one could measure well and easily until the oscilloscope was invented.