London Times Censors Mass Opposition To Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccine
The London Times newspaper has apparently censored scores of comments on its own website that expressed vehement opposition to plans by the UK government to implement a mandatory vaccination program for swine flu.
As we reported on Sunday, respondents to a London Times article concerning the fact that the vaccine will be rushed through safety procedures in just five days, increasing the chances of it causing deaths and injuries in the thousands, as happened with the 1977 mass vaccination program in the U.S. which killed more people than the actual swine flu virus, overwhelmingly indicated that they would refuse to take the shot.
At one point, out of the first 50 comments on the article, over 40 expressed opposition to taking the shot and the other handful were merely asking questions about it. Hardly any comments expressed support for the nationwide rollout of the swine flu vaccine.
The overwhelming majority of comments were in the context of the following sample.
“Nobody’s coming anywhere near me or my family with their experimental mass vaccine/poison programme,” wrote one. “We will take our chances of catching their manufactured bird/pig/human virus, that was accidentally on purpose! released onto an unsuspecting public in the first place!”
“Anybody who reads this obviously still has the ability to reason and be guided by their own survival instinct and thus should listen to it. The mass fear mongering is a worldwide, co-ordinated and open conspiracy with massive geo political underpinnings. Don’t be fooled, eat properly and exercise,” adds another.
“A vaccine that is – effectively – being tested on the population, the prime reasons for such being the economy and easing pressure on the NHS? I’ll be another one who passes,” comments another.
“Thanks but no thanks. Rushed through tests in 5 days? What about long term effects? Vioxx and Thalidomide had long testing. How safe did they turn out to be? The side effects of Statins that they want everyone to take are worrying. I’ll take my chances with cholesterol,” writes another.
As of today however, the original London Times article that featured the comments (Swine flu vaccine rushed through safety checks) has been completely wiped clean, and the scores of comments expressing refusal to comply with any potential mandatory vaccination program have been sent down the memory hole.
As we reported on Sunday, respondents to a London Times article concerning the fact that the vaccine will be rushed through safety procedures in just five days, increasing the chances of it causing deaths and injuries in the thousands, as happened with the 1977 mass vaccination program in the U.S. which killed more people than the actual swine flu virus, overwhelmingly indicated that they would refuse to take the shot.
At one point, out of the first 50 comments on the article, over 40 expressed opposition to taking the shot and the other handful were merely asking questions about it. Hardly any comments expressed support for the nationwide rollout of the swine flu vaccine.
The overwhelming majority of comments were in the context of the following sample.
“Nobody’s coming anywhere near me or my family with their experimental mass vaccine/poison programme,” wrote one. “We will take our chances of catching their manufactured bird/pig/human virus, that was accidentally on purpose! released onto an unsuspecting public in the first place!”
“Anybody who reads this obviously still has the ability to reason and be guided by their own survival instinct and thus should listen to it. The mass fear mongering is a worldwide, co-ordinated and open conspiracy with massive geo political underpinnings. Don’t be fooled, eat properly and exercise,” adds another.
“A vaccine that is – effectively – being tested on the population, the prime reasons for such being the economy and easing pressure on the NHS? I’ll be another one who passes,” comments another.
“Thanks but no thanks. Rushed through tests in 5 days? What about long term effects? Vioxx and Thalidomide had long testing. How safe did they turn out to be? The side effects of Statins that they want everyone to take are worrying. I’ll take my chances with cholesterol,” writes another.
As of today however, the original London Times article that featured the comments (Swine flu vaccine rushed through safety checks) has been completely wiped clean, and the scores of comments expressing refusal to comply with any potential mandatory vaccination program have been sent down the memory hole.
-
- groups:
- News, News and Politics
-
-
-
-
- TheEmpireGuy
- added this
-
does anyone think this is strange that they would censor comments such as these? I for one do. Vote this up
-
-
-
-
- AmericanStandard
- 4 months ago
-
-
Well go figure, people don't want to be forced to be injected with something that has been out for all of a week. Most drugs take 5 years or more of testing to get through.
-
the US did a mandatory H1N1 vaccination in the 70's. It did not go well.
-
-
-
-
- bombastinator
- 4 months ago
-
-
It is all a big conspiracy! All the world governments, all the doctors and scientists, and now even the London Times! They are all out to get you!
Quick, run and hide! Go to the bomb shelter! The end is near! The sky is falling!
-
-
-
-
- unimatrix0
- 4 months ago
-
