What's the positive spin on military mandates?

[Dinkis14]

You're a fuckin moron.

Sensitive today, aren’t we? Keep those blinders on, pal

 

[PleasureMoose]

 

[Viking]

Someone explain the EUA for this jab. Does anyone defending giving this to our military understandf it's all BS? You sit there and say 'well, Uncle Sam says so" What if I told you that ain't Uncle Sam? It's FUCKING HANOI JANE and you people are ok with it. I half think some in here are controlled opposition. One of you assholes defend the EUA and then using that BS to jab our boys!

 

[Fansong63]

I am not sure of the history on this but hasn't the military been giving vaccines to service members forever now? I know this is not a vaccine, but they sure do pimp it like it is one. Also, what is the verbiage in the militaries contract that is signed by recruits? Do they say in there that you are subject to any and all vaccines that the leaders deem worthy? Honest questions, as I am not going to side with service members or be against them either without knowing what they contractually obligated to.

I question this as someone who is not anti vax or pro vax (I am pro personal choice.) I just think that if you were dumb enough to agree to their terms, in writing, you really have little room to complain about being required to get the shot.

I was in the military in the 60's and we got mandatory shots. Typhoid, Typhus, Tetanus among others. No opting out.

 

[PleasureMoose]

Someone explain the EUA for this jab. Does anyone defending giving this to our military understandf it's all BS? You sit there and say 'well, Uncle Sam says so" What if I told you that ain't Uncle Sam? It's FUCKING HANOI JANE and you people are ok with it. I half think some in here are controlled opposition. One of you assholes defend the EUA and then using that BS to jab our boys!

I've been waiting for someone to put together a solid rebuttal for EUA and so far it's only been is "because the government says so" it's very strange. Everyone here already knows that you're government property Noone is arguing that someone give us a pro eua argument...?

 

[Viking]

I've been waiting for someone to put together a solid rebuttal for EUA and so far it's only been is "because the government says so" it's very strange

I am also still waiting. You knwo what? They fucking can't. They justify it by saying 'that's the way it's always been" lazy bastards can't debate the simple facts so they broad stroke you. Lemmings.

 

[America 1st]

No reason for this jab. We have other remedies and cures and as such should nullify the 'emergency use only" condition for any and all jabs. This is an attack by the chicomms on our country and this twink thinks it's ok. You must be a chicomm. Duly noted.

Are all the military folks who got it chicomms too?

Is forgoing personal safety to maintain one’s post, in defense this country, the mark of a chicomm?

Is Trump a chicomm because he got the jab?

Are all folks who got the jab chicomms and war criminals?

Asking for a friend of course.

 

[PleasureMoose]

I am also still waiting. You knwo what? They fucking can't. They justify it by saying 'that's the way it's always been" lazy bastards can't debate the simple facts so they broad stroke you. Lemmings.

It's like they're trying to find something to say but there's absolutely nothing.. so it's insults or "muh government always done it." We already know that part.

 

[PleasureMoose]

Are all the military folks who got it chicomms too?

Is forgoing personal safety to maintain one’s post, in defense this country, the mark of a chicomm?

Is Trump a chicomm because he got the jab?

Are all folks who got the jab chicomms and war criminals?

Asking for a friend of course.

You just asking @Viking these questions

 

[Viking]

Are all the military folks who got it chicomms too?

Is forgoing personal safety to maintain one’s post, in defense this country, the mark of a chicomm?

Is Trump a chicomm because he got the jab?

Are all folks who got the jab chicomms and war criminals?

Asking for a friend of course.

Defend the EUA. Why not load our bases up with the treatments that actually work?

 

[PleasureMoose]

Defend the EUA. Why not load our bases up with the treatments that actually work?

It's took 80+ posts and still nothing. I'm not sure anyone can rebuttal this

 

[America 1st]

You just asking @Viking these questions

No I’m genuinely curious.

Would be open to yore feelings on the topic as well.

I've been waiting for someone to put together a solid rebuttal for EUA and so far it's only been is "because the government says so" it's very strange. Everyone here already knows that you're government property Noone is arguing that someone give us a pro eua argument...?

People don’t need to rebut EUA.

The jab being mandated isn’t under EUA. It’s full A.

If we’re talking about EUA for the whole country then the obvious answer is over half the country went out and partook under EUA. There was a demand for a product by the general public and it was made available.

I personally support people being able to take HCQ, Iver, or the jab. Let the people choose what they want. Give them as many options as possible.

I’m haven’t taken the jab either so

 

[Viking]

The jab would not even be authorized for emergency use if they didn't suppress HCQ, Ivermectin, and monoclonal antibodies. You dolt. Stick to frog memes!

 

[Cincinattus91]

Are all the military folks who got it chicomms too?

Is forgoing personal safety to maintain one’s post, in defense this country, the mark of a chicomm?

Is Trump a chicomm because he got the jab?

Are all folks who got the jab chicomms and war criminals?

Asking for a friend of course.

Lol seriously?

The nature of the mandates has absolutely nothing to do with the political allegiance of those taking them

Most did it because they we're pushed in that direction, some because they we're legitimately scared and thought the vax would protect them

The people who took zyclon b weren't war criminals

Do you trust the FDA? Are the clinical trials over? Do you believe we should mandate meals in accordance with the tremendour FDA Food pyramid?

Is this vaccine like others? Do you beleive those who refuse whould be dishonorably discharged?

 

[TJHall1]

Sensitive today, aren’t we? Keep those blinders on, pal

Not sensitive at all. Blinders? If you weren't a fuckin moron you'd know there are exceptions for facial hair.

 

[PleasureMoose]

Defend the EUA. Why not load our bases up with the treatments that actually work?

It's took 80+ posts and still nothinf I'm not sure anyone can rebuttal this

No I’m genuinely curious.

Would be open to yore feelings on the topic as well.


People don’t need to rebut EUA.

The jab being mandated isn’t under EUA. It’s full A.

If we’re talking about EUA for the whole country then the obvious answer is over half the country went out and partook under EUA. There was a demand for a product by the general public and it was made available.

I personally support people being able to take HCQ, Iver, or the jab. Let the people choose what they want. Give them as many options as possible.

I’m haven’t taken the jab either so

It looks like we're in agreement than for the most part. Only argument to your questions were that everyone has the right to jab or not to jab. If your job requires it you have the choice to find a different job that doesn't or jab up. It's quite simple.

There's plenty of jobs in the private sector that don't require you to get stuck. But if you wanna work for the wonderful government get ready to bend over

 

[Cards1968]

Do you beleive those who refuse whould be dishonorably discharged?

There's no way any service member will face a court martial for refusing to take the vaccine, the only way a dishonorable discharge can occur.

 

[America 1st]

The jab would not even be authorized for emergency use if they didn't suppress HCQ, Ivermectin, and monoclonal antibodies. You dolt. Stick to frog memes!

Thats not true at all. Those things existing have nothing to do with an EUA.


“Under Section 564 of the FD&C Act, 21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3, the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), acting under delegated authority from the Secretary of HHS, may issue an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) authorizing (1) the emergency use of an unapproved drug, an unapproved or uncleared device, or an unlicensed biological product; or (2) an unapproved use of an approved drug, approved or cleared device, or licensed biological product. Before an EUA may be issued, the Secretary of HHS must declare that circumstances exist justifying the authorization based on one of four determinations: (1) A determination by the Secretary of Homeland Security that there is a domestic emergency, or a significant potential for a domestic emergency, involving a heightened risk of attack with a, chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (“CBRN”) agent or agents; (2) the identification of a material threat by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to section 319F-2 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act [1] sufficient to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad; (3) a determination by the Secretary of Defense that there is a military emergency, or a significant potential for a military emergency, involving a heightened risk to United States military forces, including personnel operating under the authority of title 10 or title 50, of attack with (i) a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents; or (ii) an agent or agents that may cause, or are otherwise associated with, an imminently life-threatening and specific risk to United States military forces; or (4) a determination by the Secretary that there is a public health emergency, or a significant potential for a public health emergency, that affects, or has a significant potential to affect, national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad, and that involves a CBRN agent or agents, or a disease or condition that may be attributable to such agent or agents.[2]

Based on any of these four determinations, the Secretary of HHS may then declare that circumstances exist that justify the EUA, at which point the FDA Commissioner may issue an EUA if the criteria for issuance of an authorization under section 564 of the FD&C Act are met.”

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.federalregister.gov

 

[America 1st]

It's took 80+ posts and still nothinf I'm not sure anyone can rebuttal this

It looks like we're in agreement than for the most part. Only argument to your questions were that everyone has the right to jab or not to jab. If your job requires it you have the choice to find a different job that doesn't or jab up. It's quite simple.

Spot on.

It’s harder to quit the armed services but even those guys have options.

 

[America 1st]

“On February 4, 2020, pursuant to section 564 of the FD&C Act, I determined that there is a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves a novel (new) coronavirus (nCoV) first detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China in 2019 (2019-nCoV). The virus is now named SARS-CoV-2, which causes the illness COVID-19.”

III. Declaration of the Secretary of Health and Human Services​

“On March 27, 2020, on the basis of my determination of a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves the novel (new) coronavirus, I declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of drugs Start Printed Page 18251and biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic, pursuant to section 564 of the FD&C Act, subject to the terms of any authorization issued under that section.

Notice of the EUAs issued by the FDA Commissioner pursuant to this determination and declaration will be provided promptly in the Federal Register as required under section 564 of the FD&C Act.”

Dated: March 27, 2020.
Alex M. Azar II

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.federalregister.gov

 

[Cincinattus91]

There's no way any service member will face a court martial for refusing to take the vaccine, the only way a dishonorable discharge can occur.

I know ace. As of now they can't even NJP. It was a lay up so you all could gain some momentum and you still bungled it. Do you think it should be OTH or what?

Are you recovered from being called a name?

 

[PleasureMoose]

Spot on.

It’s harder to quit the armed services but even those guys have options.

That's the reason we're in these conversations rightnow. Youre absolutely right, it is harder for the armed services to just quit... that's my entire point. I don't think it's right to make these 18-22yo's that fight for our freedom get stuck when this virus doesn't affect them or their ability when it's not even proven yet. People have gotten this jab and died I don't wanna give that to someone fighting for my freedom.

 

[America 1st]

That's the reason we're in these conversations rightnow. Youre absolutely right, it is harder for the armed services to just quit... that's my entire point. I don't think it's right to make these 18-22yo's that fight for our freedom get stuck when this virus doesn't affect them or their ability when it's not even proven yet. People have gotten this jab and died I don't wanna give that to someone fighting for my freedom.

Yeah there has definitely been some adverse reactions to the jabs and some deaths.

However, it’s pretty reasonable to believe these people made their decision when they signed their contracts.

I’d also say it’s reasonable for people to feel like the Roosevelt proved the virus does affect young people. It doesn’t have to kill them to make it more difficult for them to do their jobs.

Just playing devil’s advocate with you.

I think we’re pretty blessed to live in a country where people who are in the military can walk away still. In many places even attempting such a thing would be met with a firing squad.

 

[Cards1968]

I know ace. As of now they can't even NJP. It was a lay up so you all could gain some momentum and you still bungled it. Do you think it should be OTH or what?

Are you recovered from being called a name?

Bungled it? You're unhinged. You can call me any name in the book, I don't care. You and Viking want to debate something that's not on point with what I was saying. I even posed the military readiness part as a question as I'm not certain there's a provable point to be made there. I did mention the aircraft carrier as a probable reason one could use for it. That's it.

The whole point I was brought here for was to encourage civil debate for healthy free speach discussions and bring some fun. Appears the vocal minority doesn't want that. Not healthy in any way for a message board purporting themselves to value free speech.

 

[PleasureMoose]

Yeah there has definitely been some adverse reactions to the jabs and some deaths.

However, it’s pretty reasonable to believe these people made their decision when they signed their contracts.

I’d also say it’s reasonable for people to feel like the Roosevelt proved the virus does affect young people. It doesn’t have to kill them to make it more difficult for them to do their jobs.

Just playing devil’s advocate with you.

I think we’re pretty blessed to live in a country where people who are in the military can walk away still. In many places even attempting such a thing would be met with a firing squad.

Yeah they chose to sign the contract so they should be prepared for the next step--i disagree with giving them the shot but here I am.

I don't believe it's even about "the virus" anymore, its much deeper than that. This is a way of vetting the current and future service members in finding out who is on (((there))) side and who isn't. It's basically designed to turn our military into a controlled militia. That why the administration is forcing these mandates they wanna know who they're fighting and who's fighting for (((them))).

This is a communist move and on course to a firing squad eventually

 

[Cincinattus91]

Bungled it? You're unhinged. You can call me any name in the book, I don't care. You and Viking want to debate something that's not on point with what I was saying. I even posed the military readiness part as a question as I'm not certain there's a provable point to be made there. I did mention the aircraft carrier as a probable reason one could use for it. That's it.

The whole point I was brought here for was to encourage civil debate for healthy free speach discussions and bring some fun. Appears the vocal minority doesn't want that. Not healthy in any way for a message board purporting themselves to value free speech.

What are we trying to do here? Lol

Glad to see you can handle a little riding and have conquered your vulnerability to "name calling"

See, in a few short interactions, we've got you growing past your comfort zone

I guess going back and forth with you is "unhealthy" and counter to the aims of this board. I am very sorry

 

[TJHall1]

Bungled it? You're unhinged. You can call me any name in the book, I don't care. You and Viking want to debate something that's not on point with what I was saying. I even posed the military readiness part as a question as I'm not certain there's a provable point to be made there. I did mention the aircraft carrier as a probable reason one could use for it. That's it.

The whole point I was brought here for was to encourage civil debate for healthy free speach discussions and bring some fun. Appears the vocal minority doesn't want that. Not healthy in any way for a message board purporting themselves to value free speech.

 

[Cincinattus91]

He says he was "brought" here to bring diversity of opinion so clearly he's a friend of the overlords here who has a longer way to go than most of us

Diversity for the sake of diversity will not get us anywhere

We welcome quality viewpoints no matter what direction they come or go. I won't give credence or deference to garbage wrapped in "diversity"

We seek the natural diversity achieved when individual thinking minds engage their own faculties for the sake of truth and understanding

 

[t_money86]

Cominarty is fully authorized. The jab they are still giving to everyone including military is not cominarty and therefore still under EUA. Which also leads to the question, WHY are they still allowing this EUA since they now supposedly have a fully approved version now? Doesn't that kill any EUA? Not even getting into the proven therapeutics of HCQ, Monoclonal Antibodies and Horse Dewormer. It's all a fucking crime and forcing it on military members is absolutely criminal and abusive.

 

[PleasureMoose]

Cominarty is fully authorized. The jab they are still giving to everyone including military is not cominarty and therefore still under EUA. Which also leads to the question, WHY are they still allowing this EUA since they now supposedly have a fully approved version now? Doesn't that kill any EUA? Not even getting into the proven therapeutics of HCQ, Monoclonal Antibodies and Horse Dewormer. It's all a fucking crime and forcing it on military members is absolutely criminal and abusive.

It's not about the virus anymore its about vetting the military.

Instead of supporting our military and vetting our borders to keep citizens safe this administration(regime) let's illegals in daily by the 1000s without questions and vets the united states military. Trump predictioned this and tried to tell people what directions they were going to take but he was just too mean.

 

[America 1st]

Yeah they chose to sign the contract so they should be prepared for the next step--i disagree with giving them the shot but here I am.

I don't believe it's even about "the virus" anymore, its much deeper than that. This is a way of vetting the current and future service members in finding out who is on (((there))) side and who isn't. It's basically designed to turn our military into a controlled militia. That why the administration is forcing these mandates they wanna know who they're fighting and who's fighting for (((them))).

This is a communist move and on course to a firing squad eventually

I disagree with the bold. I think it’s pretty presumptive to say anyone who gets the jab is fighting for them (I’m guessing you mean Chyna Joe and his ilk here?).

I know plenty of people who have gotten it that would love to take China Joe and the commies out behind the gym.

Cominarty is fully authorized. The jab they are still giving to everyone including military is not cominarty and therefore still under EUA. Which also leads to the question, WHY are they still allowing this EUA since they now supposedly have a fully approved version now? Doesn't that kill any EUA? Not even getting into the proven therapeutics of HCQ, Monoclonal Antibodies and Horse Dewormer. It's all a fucking crime and forcing it on military members is absolutely criminal and abusive.

No the EUA exists for the reason I listed above. As long as that applies than can ok and use whatever is given approval. It’s not a one drug for another sort of situation.

“On March 27, 2020, on the basis of my determination of a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves the novel (new) coronavirus, I declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of drugs Start Printed Page 18251and biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic, pursuant to section 564 of the FD&C Act, subject to the terms of any authorization issued under that section.”

It’s pretty clear forcing it on the military isn’t criminal. The DoD is well within their rights to mandate such a thing.

 

[Dinkis14]

Not sensitive at all. Blinders? If you weren't a fuckin moron you'd know there are exceptions for facial hair.

So do we believe everything on Twitter this week? Or is that next week? I can’t imagine how sad your life is to be so blinded and warped.

 

[America 1st]

Bungled it? You're unhinged. You can call me any name in the book, I don't care. You and Viking want to debate something that's not on point with what I was saying. I even posed the military readiness part as a question as I'm not certain there's a provable point to be made there. I did mention the aircraft carrier as a probable reason one could use for it. That's it.

The whole point I was brought here for was to encourage civil debate for healthy free speach discussions and bring some fun. Appears the vocal minority doesn't want that. Not healthy in any way for a message board purporting themselves to value free speech.

There is nothing you can say that will move some people on this topic.

I honestly thought I was being trolled at first with the way some people talk about these drugs but it’s pretty clear they really do think it’s gonna be the end of the world somehow.

The reason they call names and push back in the way they do is cuz you Russelled their jim jams by having a solid point and the facts.

Wear it as a badge of honor. It’s no different then how the crazies in Washington freak out when Trump calls balls and strikes.

 

[IAmDamagedGoods]

If you don't want to be known for titties you should prolly stop telling people to suck on them like you say you do. Just my opinion.

Well telling someone to suck my lady balls is me being an asshole . The person I said it to was so very offended . I did not realize that you could tell anything bout my tits from my pic so I changed it! . When you tell someone to suck your dick do you assume they can tell your dick size by looking at your trousers? Well they can't! So I didn't think that lil bit of a avatar pic gave away that much info.

 

[t_money86]

I disagree with the bold. I think it’s pretty presumptive to say anyone who gets the jab is fighting for them (I’m guessing you mean Chyna Joe and his ilk here?).

I know plenty of people who have gotten it that would love to take China Joe and the commies out behind the gym.

No the EUA exists for the reason I listed above. As long as that applies than can ok and use whatever is given approval. It’s not a one drug for another sort of situation.

“On March 27, 2020, on the basis of my determination of a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves the novel (new) coronavirus, I declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of drugs Start Printed Page 18251and biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic, pursuant to section 564 of the FD&C Act, subject to the terms of any authorization issued under that section.”

It’s pretty clear forcing it on the military isn’t criminal. The DoD is well within their rights to mandate such a thing.

An EUA cannot be in existence while there are known treatments/therapeutics. You can copy/paste that above all day long but that doesnt make it any more illegal than it is right now with known treatments/therapeutic that the fake/GYNA news suppresses and the Corrupt FDA approving Cominarty. The Pfizer/Biotech whatever one they continue to stab people with is no longer valid/never should have been valid in the first place no matter what spin you try to apply.

Pfizer owns the CDC and FDA which is why they're playing word games with approvals etc. Pfizer has millions of the old shit they still need to use and they don't want to lose the money on those so they had the FDA fake an approval for a damn "vaccine" that they aren't even producing in order to trick people I to believing the one they have been stabbing people with is perfectly safe (guess what, it's not). AND with the trickery the FDA is playing, the EUA still is in effect, when it legally should not be, simply to keep pfizer from having any liability for when they continue murdering people with this poison.

 

[PleasureMoose]

I disagree with the bold. I think it’s pretty presumptive to say anyone who gets the jab is fighting for them (I’m guessing you mean Chyna Joe and his ilk here?).

I know plenty of people who have gotten it that would love to take China Joe and the commies out behind the gym.

No the EUA exists for the reason I listed above. As long as that applies than can ok and use whatever is given approval. It’s not a one drug for another sort of situation.

“On March 27, 2020, on the basis of my determination of a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad and that involves the novel (new) coronavirus, I declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of drugs Start Printed Page 18251and biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic, pursuant to section 564 of the FD&C Act, subject to the terms of any authorization issued under that section.”

It’s pretty clear forcing it on the military isn’t criminal. The DoD is well within their rights to mandate such a thing.

I was directing that toward the military getting the jab. I understand the magiorty of people that have jabbed are against Sleepy Joe but also want a job.
Just about everything I've posted in this thread has been based on the military.

 

[IAmDamagedGoods]

Y'all I will admit this 1 got me! I wasn't paying attention to the facial hair just the Biden is a CUCK aspect of the story. So this may e bullshit but Biden is still a CUCK

 

[t_money86]

Y'all I will admit this 1 got me! I wasn't paying attention to the facial hair just the Biden is a CUCK aspect of the story. So this may e bullshit but Biden is still a CUCK

You can serve in the military and have facial hair. Several of us that have served have already stated as such.

 

[America 1st]

An EUA cannot be in existence while there are known treatments/therapeutics. You can copy/paste that above all day long but that doesnt make it any more illegal than it is right now with known treatments/therapeutic that the fake/GYNA news suppresses and the Corrupt FDA approving Cominarty. The Pfizer/Biotech whatever one they continue to stab people with is no longer valid/never should have been valid in the first place no matter what spin you try to apply.

Pfizer owns the CDC and FDA which is why they're playing word games with approvals etc. Pfizer has millions of the old shit they still need to use and they don't want to lose the money on those so they had the FDA fake an approval for a damn "vaccine" that they aren't even producing in order to trick people I to believing the one they have been stabbing people with is perfectly safe (guess what, it's not). AND with the trickery the FDA is playing, the EUA still is in effect, when it legally should not be, simply to keep pfizer from having any liability for when they continue murdering people with this poison.

That’s incorrect.

I listed the facts regarding the EUA.

Other drugs existing doesn’t remove the Secretary’s powers to issues EUAs. It doesn’t say anything about that in US code let alone basic logic dictates that emergencies don’t end just because there are therapeutics that some people believe in.

The emergency still exists and therefore the EUA can still allow for various approvals.

 

[t_money86]

That’s incorrect.

I listed the facts regarding the EUA.

Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate, FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.