Only proof of vaccination x2 but not a negative test indicates the entire policy including the road map to "freedom" for the last year has been driven by the underlying aim of mandatory vaccination not by prevention of the spread of a virus. Sorry to say, but it's now clear.
Repeated lies told by ministers, Tony Blair in the background running the show.
How can vaccines which have never been designed to prevent transmission, have recently been shown to be of limited benefit in stopping people who are double jabbed catching and spreading the virus be the only form of re-entry to normal life?
If there are any Tory MPs who actually read this forum they'd better take note that they are responsible for this for repeatedly voting for the renewal of totalitarian legislation and its result is the emergence of the UK as a technocratic non-democracy.
I ask them to look themselves in the mirror and ask them what sort of worls they want to leave their children.
In fact they should resign, as their role is no longer valid. If life, rights and let's assume representation (voting) are to become dependent only on vaccines, Parliament is defunct.
Planning for social apartheid months in advance (and lying repeatedly about it in public) is not the stuff of an emergency caused by a novel virus.
You are right. We are run by big pharma. The backgrounds of Whitty and Valance say it all, and Boris always ends up going their way. I despair.
I say that as someone who has been double jabbed. To my mind, the principle that medical treatment should always be by informed consent, and never by coercion, is far more important than the jabs themselves.
Furthermore, if I hadn't been jabbed already, I'd now hesitate. This is because I would question if I can really make an informed decision under threat of coercion.
Or, if I were a younger person, wanting to go to a Nightclub, my anger might boil over into joining one of the protest movements.
So perhaps I should not despair. Maybe this sinister threat will spark the anger that brings an end to this wicked policy and brings down its policy masters.
So I can enter a venue having being double jabbed but potentially carrying the virus, but a negative test by an unvaccinated person is not enough. It simply doesn't make any sense.
Are the govt. finally admitting that their beloved LFD tests are basically useless?
What possibly could their rationale be? Have there been any studies to show that the vaccines do stop transmission?
However, the thing that is most worrying is how many of the general public are happy to go along with it - stating that the unvaccinated have made their choice and there are always consequences to choice. I see this situation as more of a Hobson's choice.
@lip09am agreed. Manipulation and nothing else. One infected double jabbed reveller could infect the rest of the attendees. I'm sure they'd still find a way to spin that and blame us healthies.
@theinstaller I guess the only justification is if the vaccines do reduce transmission. I'm not sure what the answer to this is though as I've read so many different things on the matter.
@lip09am I asked in a previous post if anyone could point me to a conclusive study that shows that the vax makes you either less likely to catch or pass on the virus and none was forthcoming, even from the usual suspects.
On that basis, it appears of no use to anyone in the 'will almost certainly not die or get seriously ill' category - ie the healthy under 50s
Justification for the 'almost no-one died' under 19 age group seems a waste of taxpayer money since even if jabbed they can still catch, carry and pass on at the same rate and severity.
Follow the money still seems the correct course of action
@lip09am Furthermore, Mandatory Vaccines & Blatant Lies Minister says, I understand, the people who received placebos will be treated as if they have been vaccinated. Indicating:
1. Other people are likely to be rewarded or already have been by having rights and privileges reserved for vaccinated serfs (formerly known as universal fundamental rights of all human beings) awarded to them at the discretion of the govt. Perhaps some of the celebrities advertising and pushing vaccines have been given a pass, as an example.
2. Presumably those rights can be taken away at the discretion of the govt even if you've been vaccinated e.g. participating in criticism or ridicule of the government.
Can anyone point me in the way of any science that says they do reduce transmission?
@lip09am I don’t think they can. At least, so far, they have printed out the exact opposite. On the leaflets issued to promote their use, they say that ”we do not know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus” - NHS leaflet March 2021. What they don’t print is ‘take it at your own risk’, but that is the net effect of it.
Also, the politics now seem to be mainly about finding all/any justifictions to introduce vaccine passports. It's only connected now by a thin strand to health or any concept of a health emergency. Truly if people stopped getting tested the cases will fall away almost immediately except those in hospitals (which would highlight even more where the true drivers of the "cases" lie).
Of course, with vaccine passports cases (positive tests) WILL drop because those persons will be exempt from testing in most situations. It will then shift almost all of the testing and therefore the proportion of positive test result to those who haven't been vaccinated as mandatory testing will be left as the only limited means of accessing public spaces/services.
This will then be portrayed falsely as the unvaccinated being the only, or the vast majority of the, vectors driving any increase in cases in the autumn/winter.
They will also probably screw the testing regime so that unvaccinated tests are more sensitive, using the vaccines themselves as a screen to justify less sensitive tests for those vaccinated.
Notably, late in 2020 one of the Tory ministers, Hancock I think, said on the radio or in the Commons that every adult in the UK would have been offered vaccination by "next autumn" i.e. 2021. This ties in directly with the recent announcements about vaccine passports being required from September.
In other words, at the same time they were lying about vaccine passports in late 2020, they were nevertheless already working to the timetable leading directly to their introduction.
Secondly, and linked to that, given all the talk about vaccinating only the vulnerable and then lying about "crying freedom" it strongly suggests they were always planning what is effectively mandatory vaccination of all adults even when they were saying the aim was only to vaccinate the vulnerable groups.
It appears the now so-called mission creep was there and built in from the start. Subsequently, the road map was there as a distraction to fill in time until the vaccines could be "offered" (haha) to all adults.
