Hawaii Island anti-vaccination policies

[TomK]

I haven't demanded anything.

[missydog1]

quote:

---

Originally posted by csgray


At the time they were pushing the anti-vaccine agenda RJ and Sativa were being paid by the taxpayers of Hawaii county, since then Sativa has very publicly and persistently pursued claims of unethical behavior on the part of someone who is seeking office. I don't think RJ and Sativa should get a free pass on possibly unethical behavior while on the public payroll, just because RJ lost the election.

If they can dredge up old voter registration information on the competition and claim it is pertinent today, then their actions as public employees can, and should be, scrutinized too. Part of Sativa's whole campaign against Hunt has been that no action, no matter how small or how long ago, is off limits, so she and RJ should be able to answer the sort of questions about conflicts of interest that Rob raised.

Profiteering on scare mongering about vaccines while on the public payroll is pretty unethical to me. Kids are dying from measles again, because people are pushing the fear of vaccines, to do so while a public servant and possibly profiting on the side is unforgivable if true. If I was accused of that I would want to clear my name ASAP.

Carol

---

Well, every time I get accused of something here, Rob tells me I should not answer and refute the accusation, because that is taking the bait. So when is it suddenly the right thing to do to explain oneself whenever people get a wild hair?

I wasn't aware that Sativa was on the public payroll. I thought she was a volunteer.

quote:

---

If they can dredge up old voter registration information on the competition and claim it is pertinent today, then their actions as public employees can, and should be, scrutinized too. Part of Sativa's whole campaign against Hunt has been that no action, no matter how small or how long ago,

---

Carol, it was a year ago September. That is not old. Old would be past the statute of limitations for prosecution. It's not.

Tiffany's case: class C felony, active police investigation underway for voter fraud, attorney general's office involved, possible tax fraud investigation pending per County Clerk.

RJ and Sativa: Name the specific ethics violation then. Name the agency investigating. Name some facts as a basis for saying they were profiteering.

As for holding a public official up to scrutiny, I can easily find several Tiffany quotes saying why she believes that is the right thing to do, so I don't see a problem holding her to her own standard. I don't see any problem holding RJ and Sativa to their own standards through whatever channels exist.

I have a problem with the netiquette of acting like other Punaweb members owe a response when they are not running for office.

And come to think of it, I believe that when a person is no longer holding a job, that our right to pester them (if we had that right to begin with) is over. If a crime was committed then there are channels, but directly badgering people to respond to you, no. We should respect each other as Punaweb members and not issue challenges.

A candidate is a special case, as is an elected official. I'm personally not even comfortable with carrying that to an appointed or hired public employee. I do not feel they work for me simply because they work for the County, State, whatever. They have an employer, and they answer to the employer. Elected people, who made promises, are in a special category where they can fairly be asked about those promises. YMMV and clearly does.

In any case, the Tiffany investigation began with FACTS and PUBLIC RECORDS that came to light. It didn't start with "maybe" she was doing this or that or she could have been. Now all of a sudden you are citing some accusation of profiteering and saying "clear your name" but based on what? Have some researched facts first, then make an allegation. Cart before horse.

Kathy

[missydog1]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomK

I haven't demanded anything.

---

quote:

---

I've served, the ball is now in your court, RJ and Sativa.

---

Same thing. Before you serve someone and expect a return, both parties should have agreed to play a match. That's my objection.

Registering on Punaweb and participating in topics, should not make any member subject to personal inquisition. Unless a current candidate asking for your vote.

Kathy

[TomK]

This is getting very silly. I'm not allowed to ask people questions about policies they supported in the past without making an agreement with them in the first place? And I'm not doing a personal inquisition. I'm asking about policies they were publicly involved in. I really am becoming curious about why you are objecting to my questions so much.

[TomK]

PS. Why is Tiffany being mentioned in this thread?

PPS. Kathy - I'd use a cricketing analogy if I could but no on here would understand it. So it's tennis instead (with a bit of cricket, sorry!). After I serve and hopefully get the ball in the other person's court, then it is up to them how to deal with it. There is no demand. It means that person deals with the situation the best way they can. They can ignore it or play the ball. In cricket, the former is called "a leave" and is done by the batsmen when a delivery is not dangerous and only ends up with the bowler using up their energy. Sometimes the strategy works, other times it doesn't. In this case I think, as the batsman, I've managed to get into the head of the bowler and that's never a good thing for the fielding team (in baseball, that's the defense).

[kalakoa]

I'm asking about policies they were publicly involved in.

RJ and Sativa volunteered to "play a match" when they took on high-visibility public issues.

If they didn't want to involve themselves, they could just as easily have stayed home and not talked to the media.

[missydog1]

quote:

---

PS. Why is Tiffany being mentioned in this thread?

---

Tom, Carol brought up Sativa's behavior with Tiffany. See her post for the context. I was responding to that.

Kathy

[snorkle]

Kathy says;
" If a crime was committed then there are channels, but directly badgering people to respond to you, no."

snorkle asks;

What if the people in question only speak badger?

[]

[missydog1]

As a move towards introducing some facts into the discussion, this is from Big Island Video, December 2009, almost five years ago.

While it is true that there is and has been debate in this country over childhood immunizations against measles, polia, diphtheria, whooping cough, etc., this resolution came out of the pandemic threat for flu and the declaration that a state of emergency could be declared that would subject all of us (adults and children) to immediate quarantine if we did not wish to receive a new flu vaccination, one that would most likely have been rushed through approval and bypassed normal development and testing protocols.
-----------

"The forth draft of a highly debated resolution that would oppose mandatory vaccinations on the Big Island, allowing residents to exempt themselves for any reason, was passed during the Hawaii County Council meeting on Wednesday.

Proponents of the resolution declared the vote a victory for freedom, and a warning to those who seek mandatory medical authorizations under Federal Ònational emergencyÓ statutes. The vote was 7-1 in favor with County chair J Yoshimoto casting the only no vote. Council member Guy Enriques was absent.

The resolution was sponsored by Puna Councilwoman Emily Naeole-Beason and was in large part the passionate work of her aide, RJ Hampton, who believes that people should have the right to refuse flu vacciniations if they so choose.

The wording of the resolution had to be ammended numerous times.

The final wording:

RESOLUTION NO. 237 09 (Draft 4)

A RESOLUTION URGING HAWAII STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATORS TO AMEND VACCINE LAWS TO INCLUDE THE RIGHT OF MEDICAL, RELIGIOUS, AND PHILOSOPHICAL EXEMPTION FROM ANY VACCINATION PROGRAM.

WHEREAS, on June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a Level 6 ÒpandemicÓ and according to the International Health Regulations of 2005, the WHO and the U.N. become the controlling agencies of the U.S. in the event of a declared Level 6 Pandemic; and

WHEREAS, Hawaii Revised Statute ¤ 302A-1157, titled Exemptions from immunization; not recognized; epidemic conditions, states: ÒIf at any time there is, in the opinion of the department of health, danger of an epidemic from any of the communicable diseases for which immunization is required under sections 302A-1154 to 302A-1163, no exemption from immunization against the disease shall be recognized. Quarantine shall be a legal alternative to immunization;Ó and

WHEREAS, on April 25, 2005, Governor Linda Lingle signed into law S.B. 781 and H.B. 672 relating to the Enforcement of Quarantine, which clarifies that police officers and sheriffs have the authority and duty to enforce quarantine orders when required by the Department of Health; and

WHEREAS, vaccines are made with toxic chemicals and foreign proteins (viruses and bacteria), and some vaccines are made with genetically engineered viral and bacterial materials; and

WHEREAS, the $7 billion United States Government `fast-track programÕ means that the government can legally rush vaccines onto the market in time for the autumn 2009 flu season without ÒnormalÓ or adequate safety testing; and

WHEREAS, Homeland Security Bill HR 5710, Sections 1714-1717, shields the pharmaceutical industry from lawsuits for injuries caused by FDA-approved vaccines; and

WHEREAS, there is insufficient scientific evidence proving that vaccines are safe or effective, therefore it is not in the best interest of public health to recommend vaccinations without exemptions; and

WHEREAS, in the wake of potential harm to the individual and the public from vaccinations, and the vacillating interpretation of Òvaccine science,Ó it is in the publicÕs best interest to amend the vaccine laws, to include the right of medical, religious, and philosophical exemptions from any vaccination program; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII, that it urges our state and federal elected officials who represent the people of the State of Hawaii to amend vaccine laws to include medical, religious, and philosophical exemptions from any vaccine program.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any vaccine known to contain harmful viruses or any materials known to prompt autoimmune diseases or cancer risks shall provide cause for exemption for any person in the State of Hawaii who so desires such exemption.

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the county clerk shall forward a copy of this resolution to the Honorable William Kenoi, Mayor; Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director Department of Health; the Honorable Linda Lingle, Governor; the Honorable Daniel Akaka, U. S. Senator; the Honorable Daniel Inouye, U. S. Senator; the Honorable Mazie Hirono, U.S. Representative; the Honorable Neil Abercrombie, U.S. Representative; the Honorable Colleen Hanabusa, State Senate President; and the Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say, Speaker of the State House.

In this video, Hampton gives animated testimony during the public statement portion of the council meeting, making comical referance to the stigma that such resolutions (like herself) are Òwithout teethÓ. Naeole noted for the record that RJ was Òoff the clockÓ and not speaking on county time.

The Hawaii State Department of Health spokesperson Janice Okubo has said in response to the resolution that residents should consider the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention an authoritative source."
--------------

For the record, my son (just an example I'm personally aware of) is one of those people who is very suspicious of flu vaccines and is very concerned about the government's ability to manipulate an emergency situation and justify shooting us all up with who knows what. I'm not the level of "watchdog" personality that he has, but I believe there is a place in society for those who question public policy when there is potential for great harm.

One problem with flu is that the immunity doesn't kick in until a month or so after the shot, so the shots would be most effective if given on the "probability" of a pandemic rather than as a response to an ongoing crisis.

In any case, this resolution has nothing to do with vaccinating children against childhood diseases. It is all about rushed NEW vaccines that are not full tested being forced on the public, which is a whole other animal. It's about being exempt from the sheriff coming to the door and taking you to a quarantine facility because you questioned whether the shot was toxic.

Flu shots always make me sick for a few days. There is no live vaccine in them any more, so I have to wonder why it makes me sick and fatigued.

Kathy

[Rob Tucker]

I didn't notice the word "flu" in the bill anywhere. It was largely stocked with inflammatory language demonizing vaccinations in general. But the bill itself is moot.

What I want to know, and I will ask again, is will R.J. and Sativa give a yes or no answer as to whether or not they were participating in any manner in a multi-level marketing program for Oxysilver - Len Horowitz' alternative to vaccinations?