MA S. 2028 - Swine Flu Martial Law Bill - Moves THURSDAY! Help Needed in Mass!

The Massachusetts House of Representatives passed H-4271 in formal session on October 8th, 2009 by a vote of 114 yeas – 36 nays. (View Session Archive here: http://masslpa.org/content/pandemic-bill-passes-house-not-ov... begins at 54 minutes) The purpose of this bill is to remove all liability for the manufacturers and administrators of this under tested H1N1 vaccine.

Mission Accomplished.

Interestingly enough, where 36 State Senators voted for S-2028 in a unanimous decision, 36 state Reps opposed the House version. The efforts of the MassLPA membership went not in vain, but in fact raised sufficient suspicion in the minds of many state representatives to get an equal amount of opposition in the House as proposition in the Senate. The roll call vote shows who the Representatives are that have paid homage to the Big Pharmaceuticals and Big Government lobbyists and which Reps. listened to their hearts and constituents to uphold our constitutional rights.

Hats off to State Reps. George Peterson and Brad Jones for speaking in behalf of the concerned citizens in a failed (22-124) effort to postpone this hearing and State Rep. Lewis Evangelidis for his statements against H4271.

In a public Statement by State Rep. Jeff Perry we find that his support for this bill does not address the most egregious aspects but focus on the warrant less searches and seizures, which was of course planted in the bill so that it could be the piece which if removed would be perceived as a victory for the civil liberties activists.

October 8, 2009

Contact: 617-722-2800, ext. 8743

Perry’s Statement on Passage of Pandemic Bill

House removes questionable provisions and add limitations on Governor

Boston – With the concerns regarding the different versions of the original Senate Bill 2028, Representative Jeffrey Davis Perry (R-Sandwich) released the following statement today:

"The Bill, as was originally written by the Senate, granted what I believe was improper new powers, including the entry into private property without a warrant and several other questionable conflicts with provisions of the Forth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

The version that passed the House of Representatives today addressed many of those concerns and others expressed by my constituents by striking the entry into private dwellings without a warrant, allowing for an appeal to the Superior Court of an isolation order and calling for the least restrictive means to be used. These are all positive steps and I appreciate the fact that my concerns were heard and addressed in the Committee process.

The revised Bill also includes a Republican Amendment which now more clearly defines the circumstances when the Governor can declare such a pandemic emergency. This is not the same Bill passed by the Senate. I believe this Bill strikes the proper balance between providing government with the limited, but necessary tools to deal with a pandemic. By removing many sections of the original Senate Bill and providing a due process mechanism to people who wish to challenge the actions of a government official, this Bill is now in an acceptable form. If the Senate does not adopt the improvements and protections made by the House today, I will not support the Bill in the future."

This is not over yet as the bill will be sent to the JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY for review and then back to the Senate.

Mass Resistance blog

3. MA House quickly passes new version of controversial "pandemic control bill" with 17 amendments. More changes coming in conference committee! (We have the LATEST version.)

It wasn't pretty.

Yesterday (Thursday) as predicted, the Massachusetts House passed the new version of the controversial "pandemic control bill" (formerly S2028, now titled H4271) by a vote of 114-36. They also passed 17 last-minute amendments. Is this new version better or worse? We all need to look it over to be sure.

And thry're not done yet. Over the next several days it goes to a six-person "conference committee". The committee will create a bill with from the new House version and the more radical Senate version passed in April -- to create a "final" version for the Governor to sign.

Thursday's House debate was pretty upsetting to watch. It seemed like most of them had a cavalier and condescending attitude toward this very important legislation.

At the beginning, some Republicans made a motion to postpone the vote by at least a few days. Their reasoning made sense: The reps had received the new 15-page version - and the proposed amendments -- less than 24 hours before. In addition, the Ways and Means Committee members who wrote the new version were all at a public hearing in Gardner Auditorium, so they couldn't take part in the debate and explain why they wrote what they did. What difference would a few days make? But the leadership said no. They insisted on moving immediately. And the majority obeyed. The vote to postpone failed 22-125. (Heck, why bother reading legislation, anyway?)

Roll call vote 22-125 NOT to postpone the vote on 4271

Rep. Jeffrey Sanchez (D-Boston), a typical inner-city liberal, led the argument that basically everything in the bill is now fine so just go ahead and vote it in. The general attitude was that this is very urgent and the Legislature can't waste time looking it over.

They wasted no time going through the 17 amendments. It was almost comical: The clerk would start reading an amendment. After the first few sentences the chairman would stop him and say "If there's no objection we'll just move on." The author of the amendment would then step up and give a short speech about why the amendment was needed. Then the chairman would quickly call for a "voice vote" -- which was not really a voice vote at all but sort of a murmur -- and the chairman would immediately declare the amendment passed, and move on to the next amendment. There was almost no debate or questioning. Fnally, they took a roll call vote on the bill, which passed 133-36. And that was that.

House roll call vote 144-36 to pass bill H4271

Latest version of H4172 - directly from House clerk's office -- with amendments hand-written in!
(Read it . . . if you can!)

Main MassResistance main page on pandemic bill S2028 / H4173
We will be updating it as we get ALL the latest information and copies of current version of the bill.

The outrageous thing is that this is business as usual with our Massachusetts politicians. Nobody there acted as if this was anything out of the ordinary, though the rest of the country has paid a lot of attention. And we've seen it before, too. But that attitude still angers us, and others who think the public deserves better.

Will the final version protect your civil liberties? Or will the conference committee just quietly cave in to the bureaucrats? We know that the Department of Public Health can now access anyone's medical records under the bill, but will there still be restrictions on how they use them?

We'll keep you up to date on what happens.

& should be hung at first light or face a firing squad - Their Choice!

The passing of this absolutely insane bill - should be front page news in all major Newspapers across America & on all TV News - but of course the NWO Spin will be applied &

The Swine Flu Pandemic is Total BullSh&T - I gotta believe here in Ohio my Legislators wouldn't pass this bill - even if meant loosing Federal Funds for various projects.

How in the Hell these Public Servants can look at themselves in the mirror & feel that they did a good thing - just proves that they are insane & mind controlled!

Rush - Glen - Mike Savage - Need to show their true colors & call this bills passing for what it really is - a Traitorous Act of the Highest Degree

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-335421?ref=feeds/latest

Sept 22 20009 Update:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrzDAF4gYAU

Tim Vawter's website for this case:
http://www.safetylawsuits.com/vaccine-suit.html

(Tims site has copies of the court order/injunction as well as objection forms for ALL states)

what happened?

This is a must see!

60 Minutes - Swine Flu Exposure (1976)

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0OsvEXbOWs

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9ZfeBOnugc

Thanks for posting this. I will be at the state house tomorrow.

It's the Liablity Stupid!!!!
They will remove some offensive language and make amendments to others, but they will not remove the Liability protections.
This is the foundation that the rest is built around.

522 SECTION 19. Section 12C of chapter 112 is hereby amended by striking the section in
523 its entirety and replacing it with the following:
524 Section 12C. No physician or nurse administering immunization or other protective programs
525 under public health programs, and no other person assisting in the foregoing, shall be liable in a
526 civil suit for damages as a result of any act or omission on his part in carrying out his duties.

October 6, 2009

Massachusetts House of Representatives
Massachusetts State House
Boston, MA 02133

House members Reject and Do Not accept the Committee Report

Dear State Representatives and Members,

For the sake of long-term public health, I urge you to not accept the Committee Report. The Bill S-2028 needs to be rejected and not accepted. Why take "liability away" from those who are state employees and/or those "deputized" for these activities? There’s absolutely no motivation for prudence if nobody can be held accountable. There should be accountability not No Liability. Representatives you will personally be responsible if anyone dies due to your apathy and corporate pacification if you allow this to pass as written. Liability concerns are a key issue and if you do not kill the bill, this wording needs to be removed:

Section 1
c) During such public health emergency or state of emergency, any person who renders assistance or advice during the emergency as provided in section 1 of chapter 258 shall be protected from liability to the extent provided by chapter 258.

d) During such public health emergency or state of emergency, any person owning or controlling real estate or other premises who voluntarily and without compensation grants a license or privilege, or otherwise permits the designation or use of the whole or any part or parts of such real estate or premises for the purpose of assisting in responding to the emergency, shall not be civilly liable for causing the death of, or injury to, any person on or about such real estate or premises under such license, privilege, or other permission, or for causing loss of, or damage to, the property of such person, except in the event of willful, wanton, or reckless misconduct. The immunities provided in this subsection shall not apply to any person whose act or omission caused in whole or in part such emergency or who would otherwise be liable therefore.
"section 1 of chapter 258 shall be protected from liability to the extent provided by chapter 258."

I am certain you are aware if not in need of reminding that Government agencies arbitrarily lowered standards in reaction to vaccine makers scaling back testing and trials, this translates to a deliberate, needless and avoidable risk to public health and safety. That being said there are issues with the wording in Section 13 of bill those need to also be addressed.

SECTION 13. Said chapter 111, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out section 95 and inserting in place thereof the following section:-

A person who knowingly violates any other order issued under this subsection may be subject to a civil fine of not more than one thousand dollars per day that the violation continues.

(b) Furthermore, when the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction determines that either or both of the following measures are necessary to prevent a serious danger to the public health the commissioner or local public health authority may exercise the following authority:

1) to vaccinate or provide precautionary prophylaxis to individuals as protection against communicable disease and to prevent the spread of communicable or possibly communicable disease, provided that any vaccine to be administered must not be such as is reasonably likely to lead to serious harm to the affected individual; and
(2) to treat individuals exposed to or infected with disease, provided that treatment must not be such as is reasonably likely to lead to serious harm to the affected individual.
An individual who is unable or unwilling to submit to vaccination or treatment shall not be required to submit to such procedures but may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health, as determined by the commissioner, or a local public health authority operating within its jurisdiction.

Allowing this to pass as written and forcing it on the American people is a treatment far worse than any virus. And, it requires suspending constitutional rights and liberties. For the sake of long-term public health, I urge you to oppose Bill S-2028.

The language presented in the bill is contrary to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Constitution; the bill needs more protections of inalienable rights guaranteed by these constitutions.

Representatives and Members please take a stand against S-2028 for the American people and the State of Massachusetts.

Excerpts from: Don’t Believe the Bunkum of “Emergency Powers” “.. the modern doctrine of “emergency powers” runs afoul of America ’s Constitution … the Supreme Court has recognized, as a fundamental constitutional principle, that [e]mergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution … grants of power … and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency and they are not altered by emergency. … the Constitution itself exposes the claim that an “emergency” creates new powers as nothing but a trick political con men employ to confuse and stampede Americans into acquiescing in legislative or executive action that they would otherwise recognize and condemn as dangerous hogwash.” ---Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., PhD, JD.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin46.htm

Excerpts from: Jacobson v Massachusetts: This Is Not Your Great-Great-Grandfather’s Public Health Law. “In 1902, when smallpox surged in Cambridge … Henning Jacobson refused vaccination, claiming that he and his son had had bad reactions to earlier vaccinations. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found it unnecessary to worry about any possible harm from vaccination, because no one could actually be forced to be vaccinated: “If a person should deem it important that vaccination should not be performed in his case, and the authorities should think otherwise, it is not in their power to vaccinate him by force, and the worst that could happen to him under the statute would be the payment of $5.”18 … Ordinarily, there would be no justification for compulsory vaccination against a disease like smallpox that does not exist in nature. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recent attempt to persuade health care workers to voluntarily accept smallpox vaccination failed, largely because of concerns about the risks of vaccination in the absence of a credible threat of disease. … if a vaccine were investigational, compulsory vaccination would not be constitutional, and people would be less likely to accept it voluntarily.122,123 … Likewise, a state statute that actually forced people to be vaccinated over their refusal, such as Florida ’s new “public health emergency” law, would probably be an unconstitutional violation of the right to refuse treatment.124 … Even in an emergency, when there is a rapidly spreading contagious disease and an effective vaccine, the state is not permitted to forcibly vaccinate or medicate anyone. The constitutional alternative is to segregate infected and exposed people separately to prevent them from transmitting the disease to others. Here again, modern constitutional law demands a high level of justification. The Supreme Court has long recognized that “involuntary confinement of an individual for any reason, is a deprivation of liberty which the State cannot accomplish without due process of law,”98 and some justices have called freedom from such confinement fundamental in nature.83 … In practice, people who can stay in their own homes and have access to adequate care are virtually never subjected to involuntary commitment. They do not need to be committed for effective public health protection. … 138–140 … Today, involuntary isolation and quarantine should be needed and used only in extremely rare cases. … Yet, even with the SARS epidemic, there proved to be almost no need to compel isolation, and quarantine was almost exclusively done in the individual’s home.143,144 …

Preserving the public’s health in the 21st century requires preserving respect for personal liberty.” Am J Public Health, 2005 April ---Wendy K. Mariner, JD, LLM, MPH, George J. Annas, JD, MPH, and Leonard H. Glantz, JD. Dept. of Health Law, Bioethics, and Human Rights; Schools of Medicine, Law, and Public Health; Boston University . http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=14...

Rep. Jeff Perry’s Statement on Senate 2028/Pandemic Bill

Boston – With the growing concerns regarding Senate Bill 2028, Representative Jeffrey Davis Perry (R-Sandwich) released the following statement today:

“The Bill, as written, authorizes the Governor to declare an emergency with very little oversight. Then under the emergency declaration, the Commissioner of Public Health, local public health authorities and law enforcement are granted what I believe are improper new powers, including the entry into private property without a warrant and several other questionable conflicts with provisions of the Forth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Unless these sections are eliminated from the Bill, I cannot and will not support it. Massachusetts needs to be proactive regarding potential pandemics, but we must never trample on the Constitution to do so.”

As Bela the gypsy said upon seeing the Pentagram in the palm of the wolfman's next victim: "Leave this place!".

For the sake of us all, I pray you will defeat this.

Bio Watch : Vaccine / Flu Info and News
http://tinyurl.com/12160BioWatch

this is the sort of activism that really is important.

~

Swine Flu PDF: MAKE COPIES and spread around!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/109330

Please include these vaccine research links in your emails:

http://www.nvic.org/
http://www.scribd.com/ful...
http://www.westonaprice.o...
http://www.whale.to/vacci...
http://www.healthdangers....
http://wholefoodusa.wordp...
http://www.nvic.org/Downl...

Its really good Article. Thanks a lot

Will it help for out of state people to call?