To the whack jobs entering schools in the name of social protest

[Fancy]

I don't see where the violence of any kind occurred or what actually transpired. There don't appear to be any facts of consequence as this point.

Anti-vaccine activist Kyle Cardinal announced on Facebook that being trying to "get some answers" Friday at a school vaccine clinic. He later posted on Facebook that his group never entered any schools.

Are there security cameras that would have recorded this?

[Fancy]

...
Gee, spreading fear to school children, in an attempt to coerce them not to be vaccinated,,, sure sounds like a form of terrorism. ...

But did they? Sounds like the schools were locked down pretty quick.

[Andrewski]

I don't see where the violence of any kind occurred or what actually transpired. There don't appear to be any facts of consequence as this point.

Anti-vaccine activist Kyle Cardinal announced on Facebook that being trying to "get some answers" Friday at a school vaccine clinic. He later posted on Facebook that his group never entered any schools.

Are there security cameras that would have recorded this?

Violence isn't required to be terrorism. They intimidated, and endangered the lives of children, for ideological reasons. That's a clear definition of terrorism. Domestic terrorists, using biological threats to endangered children. Children.

You have to wear a mask to enter a grocery store and these guys entered a school with children, without masks. They know full well they might infect someone and did it anyway. How can you defend this?

[rustled]

Hosting the vaccine clinics in a school was pretty clever - makes the vaccine clinic even more of a "sacred space", and very difficult for anyone to protest, easier to condemn them if they do. Protesting the vaccine clinics anywhere is already verboten, hosting them in schools seemed to me to be to help generate public outcry against the protesters. Voila.

And then someone suggested the objective of the protest was to prevent children from getting vaccinated - which tends rather to suggest that the objective of having the vaccine clinics in the schools in the first place was to make it easier to vaccinate children whose parents had decided against vaccinations for their children.

We do live in interesting times.

Under the BC Infants Act, in a section called “Mature Minor Consent and Immunization”, students do not need to have their parents’ consent if they are deemed mentally capable of making their own decision.

Yes, teenagers are known for having their own minds ... and it's not like IHA was "targeting" the younger kids, none of the clinics I saw announced were at a primary school ... but if someone is looking for conspiracies they will usually find them ...

Of course teenagers have their own minds. I am aware of the age at which our government has decided children can decide for themselves whether or not to be vaccinated.

No one said the IHA was "targeting" the younger kids. No one said the clinics were at a primary school. Making your response to me about things I didn't say tends to suggest you're either unwilling or unable to consider what I actually wrote.

I do wonder if our schools are an appropriate place to host vaccine clinics. There are pros and cons.

[spooker]

Yes, teenagers are known for having their own minds ... and it's not like IHA was "targeting" the younger kids, none of the clinics I saw announced were at a primary school ... but if someone is looking for conspiracies they will usually find them ...

Of course teenagers have their own minds. I am aware of the age at which our government has decided children can decide for themselves whether or not to be vaccinated.

No one said the IHA was "targeting" the younger kids. No one said the clinics were at a primary school. Making your response to me about things I didn't say tends to suggest you're either unwilling or unable to consider what I actually wrote.

I do wonder if our schools are an appropriate place to host vaccine clinics. There are pros and cons.

Considering that social media is ripe for miscommunication it certainly seems like you "don't say" a lot when we mix it up ... whereas you used a general "schools" and then talked about kids who's parents might have decided against vaccination I had wanted to clarify that this was not about the younger kids ... giving kids a choice in a location that they consider a home-away-from-home would make sense in a lot of ways ... I'd say that the pros outweigh the cons ... but oh well ...

[rustled]

Of course teenagers have their own minds. I am aware of the age at which our government has decided children can decide for themselves whether or not to be vaccinated.

No one said the IHA was "targeting" the younger kids. No one said the clinics were at a primary school. Making your response to me about things I didn't say tends to suggest you're either unwilling or unable to consider what I actually wrote.

I do wonder if our schools are an appropriate place to host vaccine clinics. There are pros and cons.

Considering that social media is ripe for miscommunication it certainly seems like you "don't say" a lot when we mix it up ... whereas you used a general "schools" and then talked about kids who's parents might have decided against vaccination I had wanted to clarify that this was not about the younger kids ... giving kids a choice in a location that they consider a home-away-from-home would make sense in a lot of ways ... I'd say that the pros outweigh the cons ... but oh well ...

It's interesting to me that you feel it is your responsibility to quote my post, introduce a bunch of things I didn't say in it, and then reassure people about those things that I did not say. IMO, this isn't about "clarifying" what I actually posted. Perhaps you are interested in seeking opportunities to "mix it up". Please know I am not interested in seeking opportunities to "mix it up", which is why I stay out of the bickering threads.

It does not seem to me that the "pros" of hosting vaccine clinics in the schools outweigh the "cons" - schools have enough on their plates. IMO.

[Fancy]

Violence isn't required to be terrorism. They intimidated, and endangered the lives of children, for ideological reasons. ...

I meant to quote who i was responding to as it was mentioned there may have been violence. Seems there is debate as to the very definition in the legal sense. As far as intimidating and endangering children there is no evidence to date that has occurred to support that. My point being what exactly transpired to warrant the letters and were children approached? Seems staff acted quickly.

[spooker]

It does not seem to me that the "pros" of hosting vaccine clinics in the schools outweigh the "cons" - schools have enough on their plates. IMO.

Where do you feel it would be better to have a vaccine clinic that teenagers could access easily?

[Fancy]

Children have received vaccines at their schools before. This should be no different.

[rustled]

Children have received vaccines at their schools before. This should be no different.

I think the controversy about this vaccine is different - much more vociferous - and the public politicization of this vaccine has certainly been different.

I don't recall organized public protests about any of the previous vaccines administered at schools (although I haven't looked to see if there were any), and there was no vaccine passport requirement to enter restaurants, etc.

[Andrewski]

Violence isn't required to be terrorism. They intimidated, and endangered the lives of children, for ideological reasons. ...

I meant to quote who i was responding to as it was mentioned there may have been violence. Seems there is debate as to the very definition in the legal sense. As far as intimidating and endangering children there is no evidence to date that has occurred to support that. My point being what exactly transpired to warrant the letters and were children approached? Seems staff acted quickly.

They willingly contaminated a building with school children with their biowaste, during a pandemic, strictly for ideological reasons. They had no reason to enter the building in the name of social protest, but what they did was create a biohazard during a global pandemic for school children, for their own petty political ethical dissonance.

[Fancy]

They willingly contaminated a building with school children with their biowaste, ...

But did they? You can't seem to answer that very important question.

[two_shoes1mit]

If those entering the schools aren't carrying the virus then they wouldn't be terrorists.

Hosting the vaccine clinics in a school was pretty clever - makes the vaccine clinic even more of a "sacred space", and very difficult for anyone to protest, easier to condemn them if they do. Protesting the vaccine clinics anywhere is already verboten, hosting them in schools seemed to me to be to help generate public outcry against the protesters. Voila.

And then someone suggested the objective of the protest was to prevent children from getting vaccinated - which tends rather to suggest that the objective of having the vaccine clinics in the schools in the first place was to make it easier to vaccinate children whose parents had decided against vaccinations for their children.

We do live in interesting times.

I do enjoy your posts.

Unless I missed it..............did any of the media ask the protester's exactly what they were protesting? I would have liked to have read that.

And, to quote a news article today:

""It is completely unacceptable for people to protest outside of schools, to speak with other people’s children and to undermine the decisions they and their families have made regarding the vaccine," Jennifer Whiteside said in a statement sent to media.

As a parent of a child in school, I was appalled at the heavy hand of vaccinations being taken into the school system and then announcing that the child does not need parental consent. Yes, other vaccines have been administered in school, BUT the parent always had to sign a consent form for the vaccine to be administered.

I don't condone this protest or the way that it escalated, but I sure would have liked to hear their side, and I think IH needs to re-think this campaign in the schools.

[dontrump]

I don't see where the violence of any kind occurred or what actually transpired. There don't appear to be any facts of consequence as this point.



Are there security cameras that would have recorded this?

Violence isn't required to be terrorism. They intimidated, and endangered the lives of children, for ideological reasons. That's a clear definition of terrorism. Domestic terrorists, using biological threats to endangered children. Children.

You have to wear a mask to enter a grocery store and these guys entered a school with children, without masks. They know full well they might infect someone and did it anyway. How can you defend this?

they are wack jobs for sure but certainly never ever endangered the lives of children

[nucksRnum1]

I can't believe that these types of things are happening in Canada. We used to be a country with a reputation of tolerant and dignified people. What happened?