Australian Government set to force vaccinate everyone....

[etheric underground]

I read this post on Face book and thought it pertinent enough to share... I knew that taking payments off parents that don't vaccinate are bit of a dirty tactic....I also knew it would not stop there....and it isn't. As you can see in the legislation fine print our mongrel government have classified children up to the age of 20... and are changing the scheme to include every man, woman and child...good bye freedom of choice Australia.

This was the post......
32007
Just wondering if you all noticed what else they slipped under the table with this no jab no pay legislation. Did you think it was only about children under 7?? Like the media told you?? Well... It's not. As part of this legislation the 'childhood immunisation register' has now been extended all the way up to age 20 (it was previously only to age 7) as of Jan 2016.

What does that mean? Well, a 20 year old is an adult now, aren't they? How convenient. They just created a legal precedent for punishing and discriminating against all those who aren't up to date with the ADULT register. And read a bit closer. By the end of 2016 there won't even be a 'childhood' register anymore. It will simply be the 'Australian Immunisation Register'.

Have a really good think about that people. This legislation now applies to ALL Australians of ALL ages. Think it's gonna stop with cuts to child care and family tax?? Ha. Think again. Next will be cuts to all adult centrelink and other government (Medicare? Pensions? HECS?) payments and services for anyone who is not up to date with the adult schedule.

Next will be workplace requirements, school, university. Think this didn't affect you when you refused to stand for my human rights? Oops.
How many of YOU, even if you are 'pro-vax' when it comes to children, are up to date with your own adult vaccine schedule???? Guess what darlings, if you're not (and apparently over 90% of Australians are not), that doesn't make you pro-vax at all. It makes you pro-CHOICE.

The very thing you stood against. And by all of your lobbying and supporting discriminatory legislation against a tiny few unvaccinated children, you just lost your own personal choice.

That was a bit of a stealthy manipulative government move wasn't it? While the media had you emotionally focussed on whether 3% of kids are fully vaxxed or not, you didn't even realise you just lost your OWN right to choose not to have every single shot on their list (and for that matter any other medical procedure or medication the government deems 'necessary').

It is estimated that most adults would need over 20 catch up vaccines to even be current. Still think this was actually about health, not a billion dollar power play by pharmaceutical companies coupled with an infringement on human rights?? Flu shot anyone? Blah. Goodbye freedom of choice for Australia (if you ever actually believed you had it).

Please think about what you stand for when you support victimisation, discrimination and loss of human rights. Because whether you'd like to admit it or not, those things DO affect all of us.
Elly Prendergast wrote this.

[Constance]

We are also penalised under the Medicare system as well.

Because I don't immunise my son, we are not entitled to any free Medicare for dental health.

All this means is that we have to walk away from the system completely.

We need to turn our backs on the whole darn lot, push the delete button on it all and start all over again.

[Ewan]

We are also penalised under the Medicare system as well.

Because I don't immunise my son, we are not entitled to any free Medicare for dental health.

All this means is that we have to walk away from the system completely.

We need to turn our backs on the whole darn lot, push the delete button on it all and start all over again.

You're in a good place to do it. I spent just over 2 years in Australia and over a year of that was 'outback'. There was a sense of community there you just don't find too often in suburbia or cities. A lot of self-sufficiency develops in that kind of enviroment.

[ghostrider]

they may as well say everyone must take yearly shock treatments with no wood to bite down on ... moving ever so quickly to bio chipping , forcing free people to do this and that and then punishments when free people do not comply ...

[Althena]

The World State in a Brave New World in a NWO...

Foretold strange times indeed.

[sigma6]

those Aussies are way too independent and always outspoken, and some of the biggest thinkers and doers in the Commercial Redemption movement as well... they are willing to take action too...

so I can certainly understand why their (parasitical) government would want to force vaccinations on them...

[seah]

does the law take into account those folks who have allergy to formaldehyde?

[sigma6]

does the law take into account those folks who have allergy to formaldehyde?

why should they, when the whole system is set up to remove all liability against their actions?...
we all have to take responsibility into our own hands... your best insurance policy...

[gripreaper]

those Aussies are way too independent and always outspoken, and some of the biggest thinkers and doers in the Commercial Redemption movement as well... they are willing to take action too... so I can certainly understand why their (parasitical) government would want to force vaccinations on them...

And the violation of the body boundary may be the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak. It may be time for the sovereignty movement to really get some legs and we all learn how to rescind our adhesion contracts, stand in our own power and our own self actualization, forgo the benefits and privileges of being a statutory citizen, and file all the necessary declarations, affidavits and claims to our DNA, and collapse the constructive trust holding us in slavery and bondage.

[Mitm]

Guys, Guys, if you read that wording, it says the "Immunisation Register", this already exists for our kids, even if they havnt had all their shots.. it doesnt seem to mean that they will 'force' the shots on us, but merely keep a record of what we have had. We already have the e-health register, which is voluntary at the moment, which records all the medical records into a central database...

[Meggings]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6HPe-s1V2o

This video was posted this week (Nov.26/2015) on youtube.

Dr. Judy Mikovits says "The act of the Australian government making vaccinations mandatory this January 2016 is an act of genocide."

She published a book here: http://www.amazon.com/Plague-Scientist%C2%92s-Intrepid-Retroviruses-Syndrome/dp/1626365652

The blurb on her book "Plague" says this:
"On July 22, 2009, a special meeting was held with twenty-four leading scientists at the National Institutes of Health to discuss early findings that a newly discovered retrovirus was linked to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), prostate cancer, lymphoma, and eventually neurodevelopmental disorders in children. When Dr. Judy Mikovits finished her presentation the room was silent for a moment, then one of the scientists said, “Oh my God!” "

Here is a description of the newly released video:

"Dr Judy Mikovits, PhD, is a Biochemist and worked as a government scientist for many years developing viruses and vaccinations. In 2011 when she made a horrifying discovery that was contaminating all vaccinations, she presented her data to government officials and was threatened & told to destroy all her data.

"When she did not she was jailed, her career systematically destroyed, and a gag order put in place for 4 years threatening that if she spoke out she would be thrown back in jail. That gag order has just lifted, and she’s dumped the government right in it!

"She speaks about how autism is associated with vaccines, also cancers, chronic fatigue syndrome, alzheimers, auto immune diseases, allergies and more. She discusses how the cocktail of vaccinations pumped into babies mutate to develop months and years down the track into new viruses, cancers and diseases, some they dont even know about yet. She explains how the viruses injected through vaccines tear open our DNA and insert their own DNA to mutate our genetic makeup and be passed on generation after generation.

"She has been threatened with a suicide, murder, cover up, she doesn’t care, she wants it all exposed.

"The act of the Australian government making vaccinations mandatory this January is an act of genocide."

[sigma6]

those Aussies are way too independent and always outspoken, and some of the biggest thinkers and doers in the Commercial Redemption movement as well... they are willing to take action too... so I can certainly understand why their (parasitical) government would want to force vaccinations on them...

And the violation of the body boundary may be the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak. It may be time for the sovereignty movement to really get some legs and we all learn how to rescind our adhesion contracts, stand in our own power and our own self actualization, forgo the benefits and privileges of being a statutory citizen, and file all the necessary declarations, affidavits and claims to our DNA, and collapse the constructive trust holding us in slavery and bondage.

"forgoing the "benefits and privileges" doesn't create the right picture... the goal is to "transfer" the beneficial ownership back to the State (via the Person) by not transferring it to yourself in the first place... understanding what that means and why that is important and most importantly and ultimately understanding why that is the most accurate and true picture of what is going on in the first place... we were issued a Registered Name, it represents a superior title to what the issuer is holding... we are entitled to "use" it... but the part every one stumbles past, is that there is more then ONE way to "use" it...

you can act and behave as if you are claiming legal ownership... or you can act and behave as if you not claiming legal ownership... the two look awfully similar... but are mutually exclusive and exhaustive... two completely different interpretations... understanding the difference is to understand the nature of trust... and verbally how you refer to it in any communication is one of the factors taken into consideration when applying presumption and/or interpreting how the trust is operating and which role each party is "assuming"...

i.e. you could still have a driver's license, and register the vehicle... but operate it without taking on the "surety" for the Registered Name, but leaving that liability where it was originally before you took that "surety" in the first place... unknowingly perhaps (in 99.9% of the cases) but unmistakably none-the-less... and the reason for this is because of how "operation of law" determines how trust will operate and be applied to the situation...

In this sense trust interpretation really is an explanation of what the outcome is of certain factors or contingencies which are effected by "operation of law"...

i.e. it is the ultimate explanation of "what is" in the final analysis... that "what is" could then be used as the basis of evoking certain inalienable rights (... or conversely presumption of jurisdiction for 99% of the people out there)

therefore, it is has always been very important to understand "what is" ...especially within the context of 'trust interpretation'



For example, how do you sign? how do you describe who you are? how do you describe your relationship to any property? (registered in the public) how do you handle any charges or liabilities against the Registered Name? How do you describe yourself in correspondence? how do you express the trust? and your position in it?.... in a word are you controlling the Registered Name or is someone else?

Ironically to gain more control of property registered in the public in the Registered Name you have to see it as something you don't claim "ownership" to, but something you are only "using" (and in a particular way) No big deal right? The two could look the same from "outside" observation (with the exception of small details) Again the difference is largely in the interpretation...

and in one interpretation you have control, and in the other... they have jurisdiction Is it any wonder people are so blind to what is going on?

and everyone is always obsessively looking for some "paperwork" that is going to do the talking for them? o.O?

it's not about paperwork, in fact trust could be completely operated without any paperwork at all... but with complete and perfect understanding... technically just the proper presentation of the bc to the right party and with the right expression of intention... it can be that subtle...