PDA

View Full Version : posse comitatus



Shanny
04-23-2009, 12:19 PM
Military illegally on city streets????? is this china

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=45206

Upper Decker
04-23-2009, 02:06 PM
No this isnt China , this is Canada. The links you provided pertain to the US and not Canada.

DoubleXL
04-23-2009, 02:18 PM
Military illegally on city streets????? is this china

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=45206

First off, stop listening to Alex Jones, hes a kook. Second, this law does not apply to Canada. Our government at any time can use the War Measures Act to allow soldiers on our streets. Being we are technically at war (in Afganistan) they could do this at any time. They have not however. So take a chill pill, and quit drinking the yellow coolaid. Just because Alex Jones says the coolaid is safe, doesn't mean that drinking someones piss is ok.

DoubleXL
04-23-2009, 02:21 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergencies_Act check this link. Under our laws, even under the Emergencies Act, we are still entitled to our rights.

The Emergencies Act differs from the War Measures Act in two important ways:

1.A declaration of an emergency by the Cabinet must be reviewed by Parliament
2.Any temporary laws made under the Act are subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Thus any attempt by the government to suspend the civil rights of Canadians, even in an emergency, will be subject to the "reasonable and justified" test under section 1 of the Charter. [1]

Wrangler35
04-23-2009, 04:02 PM
First off, stop listening to Alex Jones, hes a kook. Second, this law does not apply to Canada. Our government at any time can use the War Measures Act to allow soldiers on our streets. Being we are technically at war (in Afganistan) they could do this at any time. They have not however. So take a chill pill, and quit drinking the yellow coolaid. Just because Alex Jones says the coolaid is safe, doesn't mean that drinking someones piss is ok.

Shanny...i hope you are not going to disappoint your followers...I mean..stand up to this opinion will yeah!

DoubleXL
04-23-2009, 04:11 PM
There is nothing to respond to. Our laws do not allow the government (military included) from abusing our civil rights. Posse Comitatus does not even apply in this country. The only time you ever see the military on our streets is when they are walking somewhere, driving their vehicles, or training. If this were China, you would be in prison now for even starting this thread.

Shanny
04-23-2009, 11:07 PM
I dont take comments like these to heart either. Just more sheep who think cause its on the other side of an ever disappearing border it doesnt affect them. And just to clarify we are not at war in aphganistan the government is working with us we are POLICING their country as the amercan's puppet army

Hey Mr DJ
04-23-2009, 11:29 PM
Living in fear is not healthy.

DoubleXL
04-24-2009, 03:38 AM
I dont take comments like these to heart either. Just more sheep who think cause its on the other side of an ever disappearing border it doesnt affect them. And just to clarify we are not at war in aphganistan the government is working with us we are POLICING their country as the amercan's puppet army

Ever disappearing border? Are you kidding me? It is more difficult to get across the border now than it ever has been. We ARE at war in Afganistan. Anytime you have soldiers going on missions to attack "the enemy" it becomes a war. Call it what you want, the war on terror, the war against extremism, or the war in Afganistan, its still a war. We are not a "puppet army" we are a member of NATO. Like, how about checking facts before just spewing nonsense. The subject of the thread is posse comitatus ~ IT DOESN'T APPLY HERE. Thread done.

Can a mod close this thread, next we are going to here about all the FEMA camps in the US. Give me a break.

Shanny
04-24-2009, 10:23 PM
NATO is not at war in Aphganistan either. Canada in Aphgan has nothing to do with NATO

and when did I ever say posse comitatus had anything to do with canada? The story was about how US military all over the country have been policing. How about YOU research before spewing tired ass cnn propaganda.

shure
04-27-2009, 03:18 AM
Shanny do you listen to Alex Jones alot?

Shanny
04-27-2009, 08:56 PM
I lsiten once or twice a week, and what do you know for the past 3 months he's had experts on talking about a flu outbreak coming and BAM look whats happening now

shure
04-27-2009, 09:38 PM
He's been talking about it for years, it was bound to happen sooner or later. Just don't let that fathead get you all hyped up into a panic with all his half truths and fear mongering.

DoubleXL
05-02-2009, 05:54 PM
NATO is not at war in Aphganistan either. Canada in Aphgan has nothing to do with NATO

and when did I ever say posse comitatus had anything to do with canada? The story was about how US military all over the country have been policing. How about YOU research before spewing tired ass cnn propaganda.

First of all, I don't watch CNN. I consult every reputable news source online, and on TV. Alex Jones is not one of them. I doubt anyone on here cares about US soldiers patrolling in the US, seems like their problem, not ours. CANADA is a part of NATO, Canada is currently participating in the NATO led International Security Assistance Force. You did not mention the US in your original post, it just contained links.

Shanny
05-05-2009, 11:43 PM
We have been told ad naseum by the mainstream media over and over again that we are fighting a war in Afghanistan as part of the war on terrorism, for democracy and for women's rights.

Each one of these assertions is false.

The war on terror is predicated on the false flag terrorist events of 9/11. That is to say that all of the evidence regarding 9/11 points towards a terrorist act conducted by, or at the very least assisted by criminal elements within the United States government itself. This is true for all those that have the eyes to see and ears to hear the truth about those events – the evidence is simply overwhelming. History is filled with declassified examples of government-sponsored terror including, but not limited to, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that led the United States into Vietnam and in the attacks on the USS Liberty many years ago. The war on terror is in reality a war of terror conducted against us - the public. It is designed to make us terrified and compliant and justify the stripping of our hard won rights and freedoms.

The statement that we are there in order to bring democracy to a country that was a totalitarian regime that sponsored terrorism is ridiculous. Were this true, we would not be there supporting the current regime which is dominated by warlords and drug lords. In reality, we have simply replaced one totalitarian regime with another. And furthermore, as history has shown our government has never had any aversion towards supporting totalitarian regimes in the past, such as those in China or Central and South America, provided they were compliant with Canadian and US foreign policy and multinational corporate objectives. A case in point is that of Afghan member of Parliament Malalai Joya who was barred from the Afghan parliament for speaking out against the drug lords and warlords and their corruption. Did our government object to this treatment, of course they didn't.

As for women's rights, progress has been slow and limited at best. Malalai Joya has spoken at length about this so I won't go into it in any additional detail.

Clearly, the reasons we have given to the public for our involvement in Afghanistan are lies and are as such propaganda.

Depleted Uranium, Nuclear War and Genocide

One of the most horrifying aspects of the war in Afghanistan is the use of hundreds of tons of depleted uranium munitions by Western nations. The use of depleted uranium is nothing less than a nuclear war that will have repercussions throughout the region and the world for generations to come. Not only is this in effect a genocide against the people of Afghanistan but it condemns many of our own soldiers to slow and agonizing deaths as a result of the radiation exposure as well as destroys the future of their families as their children are born with birth defects as a result.

"After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death. When I saw my deformed grandson, I realized that my hopes of the future have vanished for good, different from the hopelessness of the Russian barbarism, even though at that time I lost my older son Shafiqullah. This time, however, I know we are part of the invisible genocide brought on us by America, a silent death from which I know we will not escape."

- Jooma Khan of Laghman province, March 2003

Canada's involvement in the invasion and ongoing conflict in Afghanistan makes us complicit in this genocide.

As stated by Leuren Moret in her article “Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War” the use of depleted uranium munitions is illegal under international law.

“Four reasons why using depleted uranium weapons violates the UN Convention on Human Rights:

LEGALITY TEST FOR WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW


TEMPORAL TEST – Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over.


ENVIRONMENTAL TEST – Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment.


TERRITORIAL TEST – Weapons must not act off of the battlefield.


HUMANENESS TEST – Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanly.
International Human Rights and humanitarian lawyer, Karen Parker, determined that depleted uranium weaponry fails the four tests for legal weapons under international law, and that it is also illegal under the definition of a ‘poison’ weapon. Through Karen Parker’s continued efforts, a sub-commission of the UN Human Rights Commission determined in 1996 that depleted uranium is a weapon of mass destruction that should not be used:
RESOLUTION 1996/16 ON STOPPING THE USE OF DEPLETED URANIUM - DU

The military use of DU violates current international humanitarian law, including the principle that there is no unlimited right to choose the means and methods of warfare (Art. 22 Hague Convention VI (HCIV); Art. 35 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva (GP1); the ban on causing unnecessary suffering and superfluous injury (Art. 23 §le HCIV; Art. 35 §2 GP1), indiscriminate warfare (Art. 51 §4c and 5b GP1) as well as the use of poison or poisoned weapons.

The deployment and use of DU violate the principles of international environmental and human rights protection. They contradict the right to life established by the Resolution 1996/16 of the UN Subcommittee on Human Rights.”

The Real Reasons Canada is in Afghanistan

Simply stated, the real reasons we are fighting in Afghanistan are:

Power

Money

Resource Control

Integration into the Global Economic System

Power

In his September 2006 article “Afghanistan: The Other Lost War” Stephen Lendman correctly stated:

"The US war on Afghanistan was also planned well in advance (at least a year or more) of the 9/11 attack that provided the claimed justification for it. It was part of the US strategic plan to control the vast oil and gas resources of Central Asia that former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski under President Carter explained the importance of in his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard. In it he referred to Eurasia as the 'center of world power extending from Germany and Poland in the East through Russia and China to the Pacific and including the Middle East and Indian subcontinent.' By dominating this region including Afghanistan with its strategic location, the US would assure it had access to and controlled the vast energy resources there."

Canada's assistance in prosecuting this war of empire to project the American hegemon over the entire planet is abhorrent to most Canadians. And make no mistake about it the United States is running an empire with bases in over 132 countries across the planet.

Money

As so eloqently stated by General Smedley Butler:

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

And indeed the military industrial complex has been reaping huge profits from prosecuting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This includes not only American companies but Canadian companies such as General Dynamics Canada, SNC Lavalin group Inc., Bell Helicopter, Bombardier, CAE, Canadian Commercial Corporation, Atlantis Systems International, and many others.

Our brave soldiers are fighting and dying for the profit of these Canadian corporations and countless other corporate interests across the planet.

Also, after a country has been bombed extensively, its infrastructure must be rebuilt once again resulting in an opportunity for extraordinary profits for the corporations.

Resource Control

With control of the vast resources of Central Asia at stake as clearly stated by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, and Afghanistan's strategic location for the transportation of those resources to market, it was necessary to control Afghanistan in anticipation of future construction of pipelines from Central Asia through Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea.

Afghanistan itself, according to Soviet estimates from the late 1970s, has proven and probable oil reserves of 95 million barrels along with substantial natural gas resources estimated at 5 trillion cubic ft.

Furthermore, by providing troops in Afghanistan, we are also aiding the US in its prosecution of its illegal war for oil initiated by the WMD lie in Iraq.

Integration into the Global Economic System

An often overlooked and little understood reason for our involvement in Afghanistan, and anticipated involvement in other wars throughout the world, is the establishment of a single world system of financial control in the hands of private international financial interests.

Shanny
05-05-2009, 11:44 PM
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations."

- Professor Carroll Quigley from his book Tragedy and Hope 1966

This system of financial control has been successfully established in the Western countries and propagated relentlessly through the IMF and World Bank and their structural agreements to nations throughout the world through excessive debt, coercion, threats, corruption, overthrow of elected goverments, and outright war. This represents a long standing agenda by the elite to control every nation on the planet so they might control their resources, successfully extract the wealth of those nations for their own benefit, and dominate their political and economic systems.

What we see in reality are countries that have refused to comply with this agenda being labeled as rogue nations and as such have to be dealt with militarily in order to bring them under the same system of control. Nations who are independent of this system of control simply cannot be tolerated and must therefore be eliminated.

Conclusion

Why Canada would want to continue its involvement in a war that is predicated on a false flag terrorist event; that has contaminated the region with depleted uranium for generations to come; that has condemned its soldiers to slow painful deaths; that is illegal under international law; that has nothing to do with the war on terror, democracy or women's rights; and is really about the projection of power, corporate profits, resource control and establishment of a global system of financial control is simply incomprehensible.

Clearly, Canada should withdraw all military personnel except a minimal force to protect aid workers and diplomats. To do otherwise, is an affront to our ethics and traditions as a people.

If you truly care about our troops and Canada's international reputation, you will get us out of this fraudulent war, allow the people of Afghanistan to determine their own future, and provide financial and expert support to truly independent and democratic groups within the country in opposition to the warlords and druglords currently in power.

Of course, I know you will do nothing of the sort as your panel members are clearly in support of all of the real reasons for the war – John Manley for your role in advancement of the Security and Prosperity Partnership; Derek Burney through your role in NAFTA; Jake Epp for your support of the advancement of oil interests; Paul Tellier for your role as former CEO of the arms manufacturer Bombardier; and Pamela Wallin for your role as former media propagandist and your ongoing support of the creation of the North American Union. Let it be hereby stated that we know you are all champions of corporate / fascist governance by the elite for the elite. Further, you clearly support the propogation of elite power and rule worldwide, support the opportunity for the incredible profits to be made, and have complete disregard of the people and soldiers you claim to support as you ruthlessly serve the monied power interests described herein.

I will state it simply for those of you who are hard of thinking. We know you are not independent in any way and will support whatever position the government and integrated corporate interests tell you to support. This war is a fraud – you know it, we know it – and we're sick of it.

Thank you.


Guy Selzler


http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7077&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Scoff
05-06-2009, 10:34 AM
cause its on the other side of an ever disappearing border

Disappearing border? Are you kidding!?!

Shanny
05-06-2009, 08:06 PM
just cause you have to show a new ID to cross doesnt mean its harder to cross the border. Trade is much eaisier now and will be getting much easier in the future. Watch in 5 years it will be easy as pie to go from canada to mexico

dancingqueen
05-07-2009, 12:28 AM
so, I don't see how this would be a problem if it indeed did happen...

DoubleXL
05-07-2009, 07:34 PM
There are way more important things to worry about than any of this crap. The elite have always been in control, since the beginning of time. It's not going to change now, or in the future. I am not going to waste my time worrying about it. Just live your life.

TheManInBlack
09-23-2009, 12:47 PM
HAHAHA I love being right, I started this thread months ago and everyone was saying, OH your crazy,Oh the borders aren't open. Well here it is.

Look at this video and this is just one of many

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GjxYlbV_2s

Armed troops policing the united states. Get ready people it's coming soon.

They didn't pass that law for us to need ID cause they care about who'd crossing the border they just want you to get identification that has a chip in it.

Blunt
09-23-2009, 03:43 PM
There's nothing in that video to make me believe that the National Guard is there at all; there's some guy in camouflage, some fat guy in an orange shirt, and some crappy home made barricades.

The whole thing was probably set up by some idiotic disciples of Alex Jones, so they'd have a video to send in and could pretend that they and Alex Jones kind of have a "thing" together... but it's complicated.

Conspiracy theorists read into so much credible video footage until their perception is completely distorted. Then some bush league footage, like this gem, comes along, and it's somehow valid proof that the end of days is nigh.

Go buy some solar panels, some canned goods, some bottled water, and go hide out in your bomb shelter... We'll let you know when it's over.

Blunt
09-23-2009, 03:45 PM
Armed troops policing the united states. Get ready people it's coming soon.

I see no armed troops in this video, unless you mean that they're armed with stylin' orange vests and small white flags.

Scary!!!

TheManInBlack
09-23-2009, 04:09 PM
I see no armed troops in this video, unless you mean that they're armed with stylin' orange vests and small white flags.

Scary!!!

LOL the LAW says NO MILITARY should be working the job of the police. Regardless of what they are doing. I love how you people keep pushing things aside saying its a conspiracy theory. Some other people said the same thing in the 1930's and 40's and look what happened to them.

Blunt
09-25-2009, 01:28 PM
LOL the LAW says NO MILITARY should be working the job of the police. Regardless of what they are doing. I love how you people keep pushing things aside saying its a conspiracy theory. Some other people said the same thing in the 1930's and 40's and look what happened to them.

You really need to do some research:


Homeland Security Act; Section 886:

"...the Posse Comitatus Act is not a complete barrier to the use of the armed forces for a range of domestic purposes, including law enforcement functions, when the President determines that the use of the Armed Forces is required to fulfill the President's obligation under the Constitution to respond promptly in times of war, insurrection or other serious emergency."

Insurrection Act; Section 332

"Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State or Territory by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.”

1981 Ronald Reagan Executive Order 12333

This order, signed in 1981, allows agencies, including the Department of Defense to “provide specialized equipment, technical knowledge, or assistance of expert personnel for use by any department or agency, or, when lives are endangered, to support local law enforcement agencies.”


Laws change and rights are imaginary.

This is only 3 pieces of legislation that allow for military intervention in an array of situations; there's more.

People really don't understand the context that the Posse Comitatus Act was created in, nor the extent it was intended to be used for.

Stop using old laws out of context to make arguments; the government has already addressed it for people like you.

TheManInBlack
09-25-2009, 03:56 PM
All of those laws can only be used in the command of Martial law. You need to read some more, not just the parts you feel will make your point


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act


On September 26, 2006, President Bush urged Congress to consider revising federal laws so that U.S. armed forces could restore public order and enforce laws in the aftermath of a natural disaster, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

These changes were included in the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122), which was signed into law on Oct 17, 2006, subsequently repealed in their entirety.[3]

Section 1076 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". It provided that:

The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.[4]

The actual text is on pages 322–323 of the legislation.

As of 2008, these changes have been repealed in their entirety, reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act.[5]

Blunt
09-25-2009, 05:15 PM
From your source:


There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply. These include:

National Guard units while under the authority of the governor of a state;
Troops used under the order of the President of the United States pursuant to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if civilian law enforcement is inadequate to address certain types of threats involving the release of nuclear materials, such as potential use of a nuclear or radiological weapon. Such assistance may be by any personnel under the authority of the Department of Defense, provided such assistance does not adversely affect U.S. military preparedness.

Although it is a military force,[6] the U.S. Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act. The Coast Guard enforces U.S. laws, even when operating as a service for the U.S. Navy

...federal military forces have a long history of domestic roles, including the occupation of sovereign Southern states during Reconstruction and the confiscation of private firearms in the Katrina aftermath.[10] The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of federal military forces to "execute the laws"; however, there is disagreement over whether this language may apply to troops used in an advisory, support, disaster response, or other homeland defense role, as opposed to conventional law enforcement

In December 1981, additional laws were enacted clarifying permissible military assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies and the Coast Guard, especially in combating drug smuggling into the United States. Posse Comitatus clarifications emphasize supportive and technical assistance (e.g., use of facilities, vessels, and aircraft, as well as intelligence support, technological aid, and surveillance) while generally prohibiting direct participation of Department of Defense personnel in law enforcement.

The point is, there's sufficient exceptions, and your video didn't show me anyone 'executing' the law or subsequently breaking it.

TheManInBlack
09-25-2009, 06:19 PM
No what it showed was 2 informed citizens calling out a military "security" person and after he's been outted he was removed. Which shows that once someone caught them doing this they pulled out. If there wasn't a problem when they came back he'd still be there. What they are doing is trying to get people accustomed to seeing the military doing this and think theres no problem. You get someone accustomed to seeing something wrong over time they will allow it.

Blunt
09-25-2009, 06:52 PM
No what it showed was 2 informed citizens calling out a military "security" person and after he's been outted he was removed. Which shows that once someone caught them doing this they pulled out. If there wasn't a problem when they came back he'd still be there. What they are doing is trying to get people accustomed to seeing the military doing this and think theres no problem. You get someone accustomed to seeing something wrong over time they will allow it.

They called him as though he were in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act by simply being there, he wasn't in violation of anything; he was standing on the sidewalk.

As for him "being removed because he was outted"
- Maybe his shift was over, maybe he was relocated to duties in another spot, maybe he was never actually a part of the national guard; one guy standing on a sidewalk by himself is hardly credible national guard presence.

And this "They" of whom you speak, who are "they"?

The bottom line is, you let your imagination run wild and think you're enlightened. You're no different than a religious person, except your religion is anti-establishment sentiment and rhetoric.

TheManInBlack
09-26-2009, 12:05 PM
No the problem is people like you who put their head in the sand and allow themselves to be pushed around. In the video they ask him if he is part of the national guard. He answers yes. They then go on to ask him if he's done anything like this before and he answers no. She then goes on to tell him was the law is and he answers I didnt know that. Then they come back and he is gone and a civilian is doing the work. This is just one case of this going on military in many states have been seen and photographed doing DUI checkpoints and other policing duties. You dismiss what I'm saying when if you got off you lazy ass and researched stuff yourself you'd see the pieces falling in place. I'm tired of trying to wake lazy people up. You don;t want to take warnings they follow in line with the rest of the sheep. And you'll get what you deserve

TheManInBlack
09-26-2009, 12:08 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akwjAjcQnqM&feature=player_embedded

does this look like a made up video this was just the other day

Blunt
09-26-2009, 07:05 PM
No the problem is people like you who put their head in the sand and allow themselves to be pushed around.

Who's pushing me around?


In the video they ask him if he is part of the national guard. He answers yes. They then go on to ask him if he's done anything like this before and he answers no. She then goes on to tell him was the law is and he answers I didnt know that. Then they come back and he is gone and a civilian is doing the work.

It's pretty hard to make out anything anyone in that video is saying. But a national guard standing on a sidewalk isn't a violation of the posse comitatus act.


This is just one case of this going on military in many states have been seen and photographed doing DUI checkpoints and other policing duties.

They're allowed to assist, they weren't executing any laws, then can conduct the DUI checkpoints; they just can't place people under arrest.


You dismiss what I'm saying when if you got off you lazy ass and researched stuff yourself you'd see the pieces falling in place. I'm tired of trying to wake lazy people up. You don;t want to take warnings they follow in line with the rest of the sheep. And you'll get what you deserve

My wife? Kids? A good job? Good wage? Healthcare? A pension? A house? A vehicle? Food on my table? All the luxuries I could want? Oh no... not that!!!

Face it, you're angry about being stuck in a system that you can't change; and you lash out at everyone who doesn't share your anger because they're clearly not on your side.

TheManInBlack
09-27-2009, 09:44 PM
I'm not stuck anywhere. I'm jsut not letting the government push me or my family into anything that is not needed. If you think the army stopping for DUI checkpoints isn't a big deal, you need some help. You still going to feel that way when they just stop you on the street to find out where your going? Ask you to present you papers? I own my house have a good job my family is well fed and secure. I just like to laugh at people who don;t see the obvious in front of them. People like you are like dogs, you get hit by a paper so many times you just go along with everything. You think cause you have a good job and your family is safe for now that they won't go ahead again and ruin the economy and your out on the street. We'll see where you are in five years when the american dollars fails. You know how I know it's going to fail? Cause gold is climbing everyday. You know why gold is climbing in price everyday/ Cause everyone who is smart is taking their money out of fiat currencies and putting their money in gold. So don;t lecture me that everything is sunny and bright when you can't see hte forest for the trees.

Blunt
09-28-2009, 04:52 PM
I'm not stuck anywhere. I'm jsut not letting the government push me or my family into anything that is not needed. If you think the army stopping for DUI checkpoints isn't a big deal, you need some help.

What's the big deal? Cops do it, and I believe they should do it a lot more. If the army was allowed to do DUI checks, and get drunk drivers off the road, I'd support it. I'd also support mandatory prison sentences for repeat offenders. As for you not letting the government push you or your family into "anything that is not needed", you're not stopping them, you're just complaining. *****ing and whining is all you'll do the whole time. You only pretend to have a backbone.


You still going to feel that way when they just stop you on the street to find out where your going? Ask you to present you papers?

Yes actually. I don't care if law enforcement or some army fellow knows where I'm going, I also don't care if they ask me to provide identification. The cops legally have the right, if the army gets the power to conduct domestic policing activity; great. The cops here suck, and there's a lot of garbage on the street that needs to be cleaned up. I'm all for it and the subsequent lower crime rates associated with it.


I own my house have a good job my family is well fed and secure. I just like to laugh at people who don;t see the obvious in front of them. People like you are like dogs, you get hit by a paper so many times you just go along with everything.

And people like you are losers, because you think you're better than everyone else because you tune into Alex Jones and other like-minded, anti-establishment types; then you believe that you're somehow more well informed than the rest of the populace. It's your own personal ego that makes you think you're so enlightened, and it's your own personal ego that makes you think you're better than us "dogs" for it. Get over yourself. You have no credentials that afford you a pedestal to talk down on us dogs from.


You think cause you have a good job and your family is safe for now that they won't go ahead again and ruin the economy and your out on the street. We'll see where you are in five years when the american dollars fails. You know how I know it's going to fail? Cause gold is climbing everyday. You know why gold is climbing in price everyday/ Cause everyone who is smart is taking their money out of fiat currencies and putting their money in gold.

And now you're explaining how I'll be homeless in 5 years with absolutely no knowledge of anything about me. You have no idea if I live within or well below my means, you have no idea how much capital I possess, if I manage a diversified stock portfolio, if I have money invested in your precious gold; you have no idea of my income, expenses, consumer debt, what kind of work I'm qualified to do, no idea if my house is paid off, if my puc bill is nonexistent because I use solar energy, you get my point? You're a ****ing ignoramus.


So don;t lecture me that everything is sunny and bright when you can't see hte forest for the trees.

I'm not telling you that everything is sunny and bright. I'm just saying that you're a moron.

TheManInBlack
09-28-2009, 06:01 PM
What's the big deal? Cops do it, and I believe they should do it a lot more. If the army was allowed to do DUI checks, and get drunk drivers off the road, I'd support it. I'd also support mandatory prison sentences for repeat offenders. As for you not letting the government push you or your family into "anything that is not needed", you're not stopping them, you're just complaining. *****ing and whining is all you'll do the whole time. You only pretend to have a backbone.



Yes actually. I don't care if law enforcement or some army fellow knows where I'm going, I also don't care if they ask me to provide identification. The cops legally have the right, if the army gets the power to conduct domestic policing activity; great. The cops here suck, and there's a lot of garbage on the street that needs to be cleaned up. I'm all for it and the subsequent lower crime rates associated with it.



And people like you are losers, because you think you're better than everyone else because you tune into Alex Jones and other like-minded, anti-establishment types; then you believe that you're somehow more well informed than the rest of the populace. It's your own personal ego that makes you think you're so enlightened, and it's your own personal ego that makes you think you're better than us "dogs" for it. Get over yourself. You have no credentials that afford you a pedestal to talk down on us dogs from.



And now you're explaining how I'll be homeless in 5 years with absolutely no knowledge of anything about me. You have no idea if I live within or well below my means, you have no idea how much capital I possess, if I manage a diversified stock portfolio, if I have money invested in your precious gold; you have no idea of my income, expenses, consumer debt, what kind of work I'm qualified to do, no idea if my house is paid off, if my puc bill is nonexistent because I use solar energy, you get my point? You're a ****ing ignoramus.



I'm not telling you that everything is sunny and bright. I'm just saying that you're a moron.

LOL Nice answer sheep. I work for the government and WOW was in the military for 5 years. I know whats happening cause I'VE seen it in other countries and from the inside. I know what I know from experience and reading. I bought gold at 400 a ounce and wow look at where it is now. I'm sure your diversified stock did great last september. BTW I bought it listening to Alex Jones earlier in the decade when he said they are going to drive the price up and should have listened to him earlier when it was 275 bucks. If you think its ok for the government to stop you on the street anytime you like. Are you going to like it when they show up at you door and want to inspect your house? You should take some of that anger you have and turn it on the people who are giving you the shaft. Most people lost 75% of their nest eggs they invested because the government let the banks go without checking their greed. Before you go pointing fingers at people do it in front of the mirror.

moron signing off

Blunt
09-28-2009, 07:52 PM
LOL Nice answer sheep. I work for the government and WOW was in the military for 5 years. I know whats happening cause I'VE seen it in other countries and from the inside. I know what I know from experience and reading.

Yeah yeah, more evidence of how you're SO enlightened and well informed of world matters.


I bought gold at 400 a ounce and wow look at where it is now. I'm sure your diversified stock did great last september.

Actually, if you know how to invest in longterm, stable businesses (ie. Canadian banks), and you can properly value a business for short term returns, economic downturns are the BEST time to invest.

'Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful."
- Warren Buffet


BTW I bought it listening to Alex Jones earlier in the decade when he said they are going to drive the price up and should have listened to him earlier when it was 275 bucks.

So, you think Alex Jones is a genius? All you had to do was look at market trends yourself, but instead you let Alex Jones spoon feed you common knowledge because you were intellectually lazy. Gold prices have been on the rise for almost the past 10 years, there was never a reason to believe it wasn't a good investment; especially after the drop it took in the late 1990's

http://goldprice.org/charts/history/gold_10_year_o_usd.png

The price of diamonds has constantly increased since 1850, would Alex Jones be a genius if he said "the price of diamonds is going increase exponentially"? This is market research, not foresight, not genius, not insider trading or privileged information. The information Alex Jones gave you was available to anyone, and interpretable by the run of the mill "sheep" as you call us.


If you think its ok for the government to stop you on the street anytime you like. Are you going to like it when they show up at you door and want to inspect your house?

Hypothetical / Non-issue; except to you, Alex Jones, Nostradamus and Miss Cleo.


You should take some of that anger you have and turn it on the people who are giving you the shaft. Most people lost 75% of their nest eggs they invested because the government let the banks go without checking their greed. Before you go pointing fingers at people do it in front of the mirror.

Most people lost 75% of their nest eggs, because 80% of people are retarded. They would've taken losses when the market crashed, that happens, but they got shafted because they panicked and withdrew all their investments instead of leaving them and letting the market rebound; as it did and always does.

TheManInBlack
09-28-2009, 09:38 PM
http://goldprice.org/charts/history/gold_10_year_o_usd.png

The price of diamonds has constantly increased since 1850, would Alex Jones be a genius if he said "the price of diamonds is going increase exponentially"? This is market research, not foresight, not genius, not insider trading or privileged information. The information Alex Jones gave you was available to anyone, and interpretable by the run of the mill "sheep" as you call us.


.

Thanks for the graph. Alex jones was saying to buy gold in the late 90's a few years before it began to rise so yeah he saw it coming. the price of gold stayed pretty much the same since the late 80's so if your going to put a chart up put one up for more than the point your trying to make.

Where's your diamond graph???? Oh yeah if you put one up it would show the same thing. Pretty much no move until the early 2000's. Why don't you just concede cause I'm getting pretty sick of proving you wrong over and over.

heres a better graph. Wow what do you know pretty much holding prices till the late 90's and then rising. The colapse of the market and trust in US dollar and BAM off the charts. You talk about market research? gold has never even been close to this price. Well except when the market crashed in the 80's a slow steady climb. I've made a bundle off this and not had a loss. Your making this too easy. Just to let you know he wasn't saying buy a little gold he was saying. BUY EVERYTHING YOU HAVE GOLD. The people who listened are laughing like myself. My nice box of canadian maple leafs is doing me quite well.

http://www.usagold.com/reference/prices/gold-price-history.gif

TheManInBlack
09-28-2009, 09:49 PM
http://www.diamondsourceva.com/Education/images/rough-diamond-prices.jpg

heres your diamond graph, I thought I'd show how your logic is flawed

Blunt
09-29-2009, 01:17 PM
Thanks for the graph. Alex jones was saying to buy gold in the late 90's a few years before it began to rise so yeah he saw it coming. the price of gold stayed pretty much the same since the late 80's so if your going to put a chart up put one up for more than the point your trying to make.

I didn't bother posting any graph of late 1990's gold prices, because gold was taking a dive in the late 90's which made it even a more obvious investment choice; if you see an investment opportunity taking a big dive, that's a good time to invest. I already mentioned that in this thread. The fact that gold was tanking made it even easier to realize that it was worth investing in. Do you really need me to put up a chart for every basic investment concept we discuss?


Where's your diamond graph????
I guess so...


Oh yeah if you put one up it would show the same thing. Pretty much no move until the early 2000's. Why don't you just concede cause I'm getting pretty sick of proving you wrong over and over.

I said
The price of diamonds has constantly increased since 1850,

Here's a graph for your tiny brain. You didn't prove me wrong, you just think you did. I'm completely capable of supporting what I say; that's the difference between you and I.

http://i38.tinypic.com/2iiabl3.jpg
Source (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbo=p&tbs=tl%3A1&q=history+of+diamond+prices&btnG=Search&meta=)


heres a better graph. Wow what do you know pretty much holding prices till the late 90's and then rising. The colapse of the market and trust in US dollar and BAM off the charts. You talk about market research? gold has never even been close to this price. Well except when the market crashed in the 80's a slow steady climb.

First off, that graph isn't better; it's also not any worse, it shows short term trends, the graph I provided and alluded to earlier, showed long term trends; both provide useful information. That you think the graph you provided is "better" just illustrates how ignorant you really are. And have I not said, several times, that market crashes are a great time to invest? Market research, crumbling economy, inflation, it doesn't take a ****ing genius to realize where good investment opportunities are; it takes a little research, common sense and insight; or Alex Jones for lazy people like yourself.


Your making this too easy.

Making what too easy? It couldn't be any easier than letting Alex Jones manage your finances...

TheManInBlack
09-29-2009, 01:42 PM
No its called taking a tip and the tip made me alot of money. Other than that if you can't see the signs yourself that they are taking away our right little by little. Just sit there and continue to not write letters. When your children and grandchildren are stuck in a beaurocratic nightmare blame yourself for not standing up

Blunt
09-29-2009, 02:39 PM
No its called taking a tip and the tip made me alot of money. Other than that if you can't see the signs yourself that they are taking away our right little by little. Just sit there and continue to not write letters. When your children and grandchildren are stuck in a beaurocratic nightmare blame yourself for not standing up

Rights are imaginary, man made them up. Let's call them what they're are, they're priviledges, and I haven't lost any.

As for blaming myself for what the government does in the future, yeah, that'll happen.

You write your letters and clear your conscience. Like I said, it's clear that you're angry about being stuck in a system that you're powerless to change... So is Alex Jones. Military conducted DUI inspections is the least of your concerns...

TheManInBlack
09-29-2009, 04:27 PM
Rights are imaginary, man made them up. Let's call them what they're are, they're priviledges, and I haven't lost any.

As for blaming myself for what the government does in the future, yeah, that'll happen.

You write your letters and clear your conscience. Like I said, it's clear that you're angry about being stuck in a system that you're powerless to change... So is Alex Jones. Military conducted DUI inspections is the least of your concerns...


No I'm not angry with the system, I'm angry with people who just stand by and allow things like this to progress. As long as their favourite show, games, movies adn songs keep coming out. Basic freedoms get taken away. People fight harder when the cable goes out than when their rights slowly get taken away one by one. If you think it's only DUI checkpoints I'm worried about, your not reading my posts. I'm worried what this leads too. They start with DUI checkpoints. Then its ID checkpoints, then it's forced vaccinations, then it's home inspections to see why your PUC meter is using 2x the power as your neighbour. Where does it end. Our military is to protect us from outside forces not from our own.

Rights..Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions or be in certain states, or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or be in certain states.

Privilages...a right, advantage, favor, or immunity specially granted to one; esp., a right held by a certain individual, group, or class, and withheld from certain others or all others

Rights are for all, privilages are for the few.

Blunt
09-29-2009, 06:51 PM
No I'm not angry with the system, I'm angry with people who just stand by and allow things like this to progress.

Well thank goodness we have you to write letters, call people sheep on a BBS, and pass along Alex Jones' propaganda. You're changing the world for the better.


As long as their favourite show, games, movies adn songs keep coming out. Basic freedoms get taken away. People fight harder when the cable goes out than when their rights slowly get taken away one by one.

Can you refer me to the published results of this study?


If you think it's only DUI checkpoints I'm worried about, your not reading my posts. I'm worried what this leads too. They start with DUI checkpoints. Then its ID checkpoints, then it's forced vaccinations, That's a bit of a paranoid leap...


then it's home inspections to see why your PUC meter is using 2x the power as your neighbour.Unless you're one of those idiots who has the heat or AC on with the windows open, or unless you've got a fairly hefty grow op, I don't see why that's a bad thing.

Situation:

"Good afternoon sir, we've noticed that you're consuming twice as much power as any of your neighbours, we'd like to try and figure out what's causing this discrepancy"

My reply - "Sweet, that'll save me money, and then I'll invest that money in GOLD!!!! ManInBlack's been sharing his market knowledge with me, come on in, would you like a cup of coffee?"

ManInBlack's reply- "GET OUT! I'M WASTING ELECTRICITY AND MONEY BECAUSE IT'S MY RIGHT! ALEX JONES WARNED ME ABOUT YOU AND NO, YOU MAY NOT SEE MY ID AND NO, YOU MAY NOT VACCINATE MY FAMILY"


Rights..Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions or be in certain states, or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or be in certain states. That definition sounds pretty expansive; no wonder you're losing your rights. Your definition gives you about a hundred million of them.


Privilages...a right, advantage, favor, or immunity specially granted to one; esp., a right held by a certain individual, group, or class, and withheld from certain others or all othersFirst off, it's bad form to say rights aren't privileges and then use 'right' in your definition of a privilege. A privilege is a benefit that you can stand to lose.


Rights are for all, privilages are for the few. Awww, what a deliciously benevolent and optimistic sentiment. Fits right in with the other fairy tales you tell.

Rights are an abstraction, which is why they vary in amount and application across the globe. Some countries offer citizens 10 rights, some offer 12, some offer 29, some offer 0. In some countries, you have no rights.

That your rights can be taken away, is proof enough that they're not rights in the sense that you mean; they're an idea, and they're privileges.

TheManInBlack
09-29-2009, 10:31 PM
Here, since you think you know everything but seen quite deranged

http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2009/08/24/difference-between-rights-and-privileges/

I find it great that you attacked my definitions of privilage and right. They came from the dictionary. So I guess you now know more than the dictionary. I thought I was speaking to an intelligent individual but it appears that instead of speaking and assuming you understand I will have to spoon feed you information. Our rights are just that, rights. But I guess you think the charter of right and freedoms is a work of fiction. They are rights created by us for us. Not just rules made up out of thin air by a small group of people. They are the reason people died many times defending. If you think your rights are privilages given to you by anyone you, you should maybe pack up your family and move to a country which you will feel more comfortable. obviously you want to be controlled by a power greater than you. Our government is supposed to be run by us not we by our government. But this just shows me you've already been castrated by socialism and have given in anyways. There are some people who still believe that the government serves us not vice versa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castration
Here, not the charter of privilages and freedoms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

Heres a little tib bit on mandatory vaccinations,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-09-29-swine-flu-mandatory_N.htm

But I guess usa isn't reliable either. I'm not posting more cause I really don't care about waking you up at this point your a lost cause. What you don;t realize cause your head is so far up your rear is that if 10% of what I say is true theres a storm coming

Blunt
09-29-2009, 11:28 PM
Here, since you think you know everything but seen quite deranged

http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2009/08/24/difference-between-rights-and-privileges/

What does this link prove? What's it supposed to illustrate? Some guy that can't decide if health care if a privilege or a right?


I find it great that you attacked my definitions of privilage and right. They came from the dictionary. So I guess you now know more than the dictionary. I thought I was speaking to an intelligent individual but it appears that instead of speaking and assuming you understand I will have to spoon feed you information.

Oh yeah? What dictionary? I checked a few; I can't find your definition anywhere. So tell me, what dictionary; I'd love to see the dictionary that defines a 'right' as an 'entitlement', and then further defines a privilege as 'a right'; by your ****ty dictionary; rights are privileges, which is what I've said all along. I'm actually gonna look in the dictionary you cited, so please, tell me what dictionary you used. Edition as well, please.


Our rights are just that, rights.
No one ever told you it's bad form to define a term using itself? You do that fairly often; I assume it's because you lack the ability to articulate an abstraction.


But I guess you think the charter of right and freedoms is a work of fiction. It's a nice idea, but it gets trampled all over; you don't like it, we get that.


They are rights created by us for us. Not just rules made up out of thin air by a small group of people.

Actually, they were made by a small group of people, and you had no input.


They are the reason people died many times defending.

Really? What wars has Canada been involved in since the Canadian Bill of Rights (Later constitutionally entrenched as the charter of rights and freedoms) was drafted in the 60's? What did those wars have to do with dying to defend our Bill of Rights?


If you think your rights are privilages given to you by anyone you, you should maybe pack up your family and move to a country which you will feel more comfortable. And if you think the army is taking over, why don't you rally up the disciples of Alex Jones, quit writing letters, quit whining on a BBS and go carry out a coup d'etat?



obviously you want to be controlled by a power greater than you. <insert marriage joke here>


Our government is supposed to be run by us not we by our government. But this just shows me you've already been castrated by socialism and have given in anyways. There are some people who still believe that the government serves us not vice versa. I'm comfortable, my life's great. Government works for me, as far as I'm concerned. Is it bloated and inefficient? Yes. But that's bureaucracy. You assume I've been castrated by socialism, I assume you have issues with control and are displeased with your life.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castration
Here, not the charter of privilages and freedoms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

Good one, it doesn't support what you're saying, but I respect your effort to try and support the abstract concept that you fail so miserably to defend.


Heres a little tib bit on mandatory vaccinations,

Get with the program man, mandatory vaccinations have been around for decades, you have kids? You should know. All babies are given mandatory vaccines.


But I guess usa isn't reliable either. I'm not posting more cause I really don't care about waking you up at this point your a lost cause. What you don;t realize cause your head is so far up your rear is that if 10% of what I say is true theres a storm coming

If 0% of what you say is true, there's a storm coming. That being said, about 0% of what you say is true.

TheManInBlack
09-30-2009, 12:40 AM
What does this link prove? What's it supposed to illustrate? Some guy that can't decide if health care if a privilege or a right?



Oh yeah? What dictionary? I checked a few; I can't find your definition anywhere. So tell me, what dictionary; I'd love to see the dictionary that defines a 'right' as an 'entitlement', and then further defines a privilege as 'a right'; by your ****ty dictionary; rights are privileges, which is what I've said all along. I'm actually gonna look in the dictionary you cited, so please, tell me what dictionary you used. Edition as well, please.


No one ever told you it's bad form to define a term using itself? You do that fairly often; I assume it's because you lack the ability to articulate an abstraction.

It's a nice idea, but it gets trampled all over; you don't like it, we get that.



Actually, they were made by a small group of people, and you had no input.



Really? What wars has Canada been involved in since the Canadian Bill of Rights (Later constitutionally entrenched as the charter of rights and freedoms) was drafted in the 60's? What did those wars have to do with dying to defend our Bill of Rights?

And if you think the army is taking over, why don't you rally up the disciples of Alex Jones, quit writing letters, quit whining on a BBS and go carry out a coup d'etat?


<insert marriage joke here>

I'm comfortable, my life's great. Government works for me, as far as I'm concerned. Is it bloated and inefficient? Yes. But that's bureaucracy. You assume I've been castrated by socialism, I assume you have issues with control and are displeased with your life.



Good one, it doesn't support what you're saying, but I respect your effort to try and support the abstract concept that you fail so miserably to defend.



Get with the program man, mandatory vaccinations have been around for decades, you have kids? You should know. All babies are given mandatory vaccines.



If 0% of what you say is true, there's a storm coming. That being said, about 0% of what you say is true.


I almost spit out my drink laughing. You think vaccinations are mandatory???

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/index.html

Heres the form I used
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/index.html

So make all the jokes you want this just goes to show you that you know absolutely nothing. Your like the other lazy people in this country who believe the bull**** your fed. I asked my doctor about this form and she said even if I had it they wouldn't let my son in school without the vaccinations. What do you know, I was right again. No vaccinations and my son is 2 and a half years old and is the heathiest most polite and even tempered child I know. My new doctor can't believe how he stands up to the test he's been given and calls him the super baby. He can vaccinate himself when he's old enough to make his own decision. He's spent a minute in a hospital since he was born. You see I read and understand the law, I also can see when things are going in a certain direction. You're like those people who think that as long as someone says its safe it's safe. I'm really beginning to get some amusement from your posts. I realize now why things are getting so bad because theres people like you out there feeding the fire.

lynys
09-30-2009, 10:21 AM
I am sorry, but vaccinations ARE required for children if they are to enter school. I highly doubt your pediatrician has never given your kid a needle for measles, mumps, tet****, diptheria, pertusis, polio, etc.

I'm willing to bet yourself and your wife were immunized too, and OMG, you're alive!

The 6th Member Of AC/DC
09-30-2009, 10:28 AM
MIB, I am not trying to sound rude but its great that your son has never been sick but dont assume that he has super powers that make him immune from sickness. It simply means, that up to this point he hasnt come into contact with certain things that could have made him ill....

The 6th Member Of AC/DC
09-30-2009, 10:30 AM
Ever since I had pneumonia my doctor recommended to get the flu shot every year and lo and behold ever since I had the flu shot I havent got the flu and I would routinely get it at least once every year. I doubt that is a coincidence. Not to say that certain shots work for everyone as I think body chemistry has a lot to do with it...

Hans
09-30-2009, 10:55 AM
I am sorry, but vaccinations ARE required for children if they are to enter school. I highly doubt your pediatrician has never given your kid a needle for measles, mumps, tet****, diptheria, pertusis, polio, etc.

I'm willing to bet yourself and your wife were immunized too, and OMG, you're alive!

I had all those except pertussis and polio, and I am still alive also!

NewCasa
09-30-2009, 11:38 AM
I almost spit out my drink laughing.

How come everyone's always right in the middle of taking a drink when they read something they think is funny?

TheManInBlack
09-30-2009, 12:32 PM
I am sorry, but vaccinations ARE required for children if they are to enter school. I highly doubt your pediatrician has never given your kid a needle for measles, mumps, tet****, diptheria, pertusis, polio, etc.

I'm willing to bet yourself and your wife were immunized too, and OMG, you're alive!

read the forms, there right there in black and white. I actually was shown the forms from a witness couple I used to work with. They don't immunize their children for religious reasons and have 5 kids all healthy and in the public school system. So doubt all you want the laws are on that link.

Is immunization required for attendance at school or day care in Ontario ?
For children attending school in Ontario, a written immunization record or proof of immunization is required, by law, for diphtheria, tet****, polio, measles, mumps and rubella unless there is a valid written exemption. Parents/guardians are required to provide this information to their local public health unit, and to update the information as necessary.

Children attending licensed childcare centres should be immunized according to their age and as recommended in the Publicly Funded Immunization Schedules for Ontario - 2009 or as current. You may contact your local public health unit for more information.

You may decide because of medical, religious or philosophical reasons not to immunize your child. In this case, you will need to provide a valid written exemption to your local public health unit. If the disease appears in your child's school or childcare centre, your child may have to stay out of school/childcare until the disease is no longer present.

http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/public/pub/immun/immunization.html


Funny how it says BY LAW they need it. But if you don't want to get the shots fill out a form. It's against the law to do alot of things are there forms for that too?