VACCINES WITH UNNECESSARY TOXICS?

VACCINES WITH UNNECESSARY TOXICS?

Will someone please explain to me the rationale for vaccines containing mercury, formaldehyde, detergent, MF-59 (containing Squalene and gp120, both associated with autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and lupus; see: "Vaccine May Be More Dangerous Than Swine Flu," by Dr. Russell Blaylock. Newsmax. July 7, 2009), and/or other toxic substances.

The article speculates whether vaccine makers such as Baxter Pharmaceuticals and Novartis Pharmaceuticals are creating and releasing viruses to then sell vaccines. Baxter was caught with a vaccine with HIV virus in it and another with bird flu virus in it. Yet, the World Health Organization is still having Baxter produce a pandemic vaccine. If the article is correct, that's more than suspicious, isn't it?

It would be akin to Internet anti-virus software companies creating software viruses and releasing them on the Internet to then sell more anti-virus software.

Why can't they make vaccines with just the dead virus and some base like pure water? Better yet, why doesn't the human race stop sinning and then God will heal and protect all?

According to the Wikipedia and FDA, "Packaging the vaccines in single-dose vials eliminates the need for bacteriostatics such as thiomersal." Thiomersal contains mercury, which is toxic. So, package vaccines in single-dose vials and be done with that aspect.

However, see also: "Frequently Asked Questions About Thimerosal (Ethylmercury)."

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Tom Usher

      "Deadly Immunity: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. investigates the government cover-up of a mercury/autism scandal," by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Rolling Stone. June 20, 2005.

      Thimerosal

    • Thomas James

      Regarding another autism scandal Govenor Schwarzneggar loaded the regulatory agency called the Department of Managed Care with pro business regulators who are like foxes which guard the henhouse because they always side with insurance companies when they deny medical treatment for children with autism.

      Decrying applied behavioral analysis as an unproven experimental treatment they have succeded in denying medical claims because this treatment costs up to $80,000 per year. When overwhelming evidence was submitted verifying the treatments efficacy the insurance companies who are regulated under the Schwarznegger administration now refuse to pay because they claim that the treatment is educational and it is not the role of the health care industry to provide education. Needless to say the Shwarznegger administrations Department of Managed Care is being sued by a lot of angry parents who are tired of being stonewalled when they ask medical treatment for their children.

      Unfortunately the spirit of Ebeneezer Scrooge who would rather let Tiny Tim die rather than pay an employee more than what the capitalistic market allows by offering his employees medical coverage refuses to repent even when the ghost of Christmas future reveals the outcome which is not only the death of Tiny Tim but also the death of Ebenezar Scrooge. Today Scrooge refuses to pay one dime for any medical care because now he insists that that would be practicing communism. You see in a capitalist society it is not the role of the government to regulate the insurance industry nor is it the role of the government to provide any medical care. According to Ebenezar Scrooge there is no place in heaven for any communist and if Scrooges employee Bob Cratchit were more miserly and thrifty with his money and knew how to properly invest money in the stock market he could easily afford to purchase medical care for Tiny Tim.