- Banned
- #1
The first "Mark of the Beast" - and there will be more
By now I'm sure most of my readers are aware of the decree that all US active duty military personnel must be vaccinated against COVID-19 ...
bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com
"The first "Mark of the Beast" - and there will be more
By now I'm sure most of my readers are aware of the decree that all US active duty military personnel must be vaccinated against COVID-19 - no if's, but's or maybe's about it. Effectively, it's be vaccinated, or be discharged (probably under an "other than honorable" classification, with likely negative effects on veteran's benefits).
I think this is extremely unwise, given the proven ineffectiveness of the vaccine at preventing new or reinfections, albeit at a reduced level of severity. Nevertheless, the government does have the legal right to impose health requirements for the public good, as determined in Jacobson v. Massachusetts in 1905 and subsequent case law. Whether it's wise or beneficial to do so is, of course, not within the court's purview.
However, by imposing this requirement, the government is effectively making it a political litmus test for its military personnel. Obey - and you get to stay in uniform. Refuse - and you're fired, probably with at least some negative consequences for the rest of your life. It's a pretty good way for the government to ensure that those potentially not supportive of its policies are driven from the ranks, leaving the military as a whole that much more politically reliable and trustworthy (from their perspective, of course). One might even suspect that they might feel more free to use that military against their political opponents, or against the people, to enforce conformity to their decrees.
Private companies appear to be following suit in their own operations, requiring that their staff be vaccinated as a condition of continued employment, or refusing to provide services - including access to shops, etc. - to customers who aren't vaccinated. In that sense, vaccination has already been compared to the Biblical "Mark" or "Number of the Beast", in Revelation 13:16-17:
Those who aren't Christians, of course, won't worry about that: but I find the similarities between forced vaccination (particularly a known-to-be-ineffective, as yet not-officially-approved vaccine) and enforced conformity to be more than a little troubling from a spiritual perspective.
The thing to remember is that this is only the first litmus test imposed by the State. It's limited in scope and effect (although to those forced to decide, it's not very limited at all!). However, what if more follow?
- What if you can't get Social Security or welfare benefits, or access entitlement programs, if you're not vaccinated?
- What if your worker compensation benefits are linked to your immunization status?
- What if your right to travel, by some or any means, is linked to that status?
- What if you aren't allowed to renew your driver's license or vehicle registration unless you're vaccinated, making even driving illegal?
There are many possibilities where the State can apply more and more rigorous pressure to force compliance with its decrees. It's not yet done so . . . but that doesn't mean it won't. Our present (illegitimate) administration and its progressive-left-wing allies are determined to rule, whether we like it or not. Their demands are not based on medical science or health considerations at all - we know this, because they've been caught lying so often and so consistently, and the pseudo-"science" involved has so often been confounded and exposed by later developments.
No, it's all about CONTROL. They know that the only way they can stay in power is by controlling any and all opposition: and a health "crisis", manufactured or otherwise, provides a perfect cover for forcing people to conform to their will - or else.
Also, remember that COVID-19 is only one pretext to strengthen their control. There will be more.
- What if we have another 9/11?
- What if a massive cyber-attack takes down essential US infrastructure?
- What if supply chain disruption means that supplies of essential materials become scarce, so that the government takes over their distribution - and, in doing so, ensures that those who obey its edicts get them first, or more of them than others? Rationing is one of the most effective means of social control available.
- What if global economic conditions lead to massive recession and depression that throws millions more Americans out of work, forcing them to rely on a government "safety net" to survive? What conditions might be applied to qualifying for that "safety net"?
There are any number of possible scenarios, and I have no doubt many of them are actively under consideration by the powers that be as I write these words. They may not even need such a pretext. They are bound and determined to make us conform to their "Great Reset", whether we want to or not. They know, with all the fervor and fanaticism of a religious zealot, that they're right and we're wrong: and they therefore feel completely justified in forcing us to conform, or else.
I've quoted C. S. Lewis on this subject before, and it's worth doing so again, particularly in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Prescient words, that look to be coming true in our own times. The State does, indeed, appear to classify those who disagree with its motivations and actions in the same light as "infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals".
There is going to be no peaceful way out of this. The irresistible forces of socialism and statism and oligarchy are running headlong into the forces of freedom and individuality and self-determination. Only one side can survive such a confrontation. The upshot, of course, is that every single American is going to have to choose a side. There won't be a "middle ground" in which to meet, or a fence on which to sit. There are already all too many Americans who would rather fight each other than talk to each other, and behave like civilized human beings.
The situation is made worse by the reality that those who stole power last November are using the fruits of that crime to impose their will upon us. They have no legitimacy; therefore, they're going to seize a sort of pseudo-legitimacy, even if it's a false front, by forcing us to kowtow to it - and to them.
Every day, the sparks are getting closer and closer to the tinder. When it ignites . . . it's not going to be pretty. Batten down your hatches and brace yourselves, friends.
Peter"
Does anyone believe the man is wrong about his conclusions?
Multiple posters here have gleefully told us they intend to force anyone who doesn't go along with this shit from society, he's not exaggerating about the coercion and force they intend to use.
Does anyone think this man is wrong about what we're going to have to do?
