Mothering Forum banner
61 - 80 of 198 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,147 Posts
i cannot get worked up over whether he is an official whistleblower or not. Does anyone really care?


The big deal is:

He claimed autism was found to be more common in African American males if they were vaccinated according to a specific schedule, and that this information was omitted

He claimed study protocol was not followed

and...

The CDC has not really done a darn thing about these accusations.

Whether or not he has whistleblower status really does not deserve much discussion, IMHO.
But it is a great distraction from the real issues and a nice way to claim that vaccine critics are sloppy with the facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
See this whistleblower government website that says you file for protection only AFTER you have faced retaliation from your employer (within 30 days).

http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
Google much and not reading? Did you just look at the first page and assume 30 days must mean retaliation in all situations? You do know that Federal Employees are treated differently because of who their employer is? You are aware, I'm asking because it certainly doesn't seem like you are NOT!- correct or have Dorit tell you what to say, I guess, there is this act you might want to read up on - Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 When one is a Federal Employee it's not like a private sector employee, you fall into a totally separate category, thus a special whistleblower law just for them. What you copied and pasted what for the rest non-federal employees! Kind of a BIG huge difference!

Did you miss this?

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). [15 U.S.C. §2087] Protects employees who report to their employer, the federal government, or a state attorney general reasonably perceived violations of any statute or regulation within the jurisdiction of the Consumer Safety Product Safety Commission (CPSC). CPSIA covers employees of consumer product manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers, and private labelers. 29 CFR 1983



(2) testified or is about to testify in a proceeding concerning such violation;
(3) assisted or participated or is about to assist or participate in such a proceeding; or
(4) objected to, or refused to participate in, any activity, policy, practice, or assigned task that the employee (or other such person) reasonably believed to be in violation of any provision of this chapter or any other Act enforced by the Commission, or any order, rule, regulation, standard, or ban under any such Acts.

Just some FYI - what you can google vs what a lawyer trained in employment law tells you can and often is two different things. This above is just a small part of what an employment lawyer deals with and EACH case can be different when you are dealing with a high level govt. position. The just 30 days is not 100% accurate depending on the situation. Thought Dorit would have explained this better, but there clearly is a reason she omits quite a lot! :grin:

Most people are quite clueless on even basics of employment law, you can quite your job, be granted unemployment and still win a filing with the govt! Only a good attorney tells you what is legal and what isn't.

As @kathymuggle put is, this really is about what he is saying about the MMR, but the PRO Agenda is trying their best to distract, deflect and discredit at all costs! It's :laugh how desperate some have become to not deal with this! Don't like the message, go after what ever! Apparently this really eats them up that one would be able to a whistleblower about vaccines! Those all so perfect with no issues medical procedures!


Here is some light reading you and Dorit may want to glance over..................enjoy!

http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=557972&version=559604

for starters - To qualify as a protected whistleblower, a Federal employee or applicant for employment must disclose: a violation of any law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. However, this disclosure alone is not enough to obtain protection under the law. The individual also must: avoid using normal channels if the disclosure is in the course of the employee’s duties; make the report to someone other than the wrongdoer; and suffer a personnel action, the agency’s failure to take a personnel action, or the threat to take or not take a personnel action. Lastly, the employee must seek redress through the proper channels before filing an appeal with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”). A potential whistleblower’s failure to meet even one of these criteria will deprive the MSPB of jurisdiction, and render us unable to provide any redress in the absence of a different (non-whistleblowing) appeal right.

And again, like I said when the said "whistleblower" holds a high position, things tend to be a bit different!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
My understanding was that Hooker was in hot water for recording a phone conversation without Thompson's consent, which is illegal in the state of California. While that could just be coming from vaxxy-bloggers trying to stir up trouble, if Hooker was in full compliance with the law, the transcripts should show him asking: "Do I have your permission to record this phone call?" Otherwise, Thompson would have a civil case against him. It's interesting that he hasn't pursued it, though. At any rate, if he was unaware of being recorded when he opened up to Hooker, I doubt he was a true "whistleblower" or anyone else with a guilty conscience trying to go public with a confession.

This is just my opinion: I think there are a couple of versions here. There is what really happened. And there is what has been put out to social media to do damage control and protect people.

In my search today I saw that Hooker claims to have gone to Oregon to record the calls.

“I did record phone conversations without his prior knowledge. That’s not something I took lightly, and I went to the state of Oregon to do it,” said Hooker, the father of an autistic child. “I live fairly close to the Oregon border, so for most of the conversation I was taping him in a hotel. The stuff that was being revealed was really radioactive. I consulted with two different attorneys and decided to go ahead and record these phone calls.”
Oregon is a one party consent state as it pertains to phone call recordings. I know in his lawyer's statement Thompson claims not to have known the calls were recorded. Perhaps Hooker never mentioned it. But I can't believe that Thompson wouldn't have suspected it. He did seem tortured about keeping the secrets of what he knew and I would imagine it might bring him relief to have it out there. Like I said, just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,389 Posts
Discussion Starter · #65 ·
i cannot get worked up over whether he is an official whistleblower or not. Does anyone really care?


The big deal is:

He claimed autism was found to be more common in African American males if they were vaccinated according to a specific schedule, and that this information was omitted

He claimed study protocol was not followed

and...

The CDC has not really done a darn thing about these accusations.

Whether or not he has whistleblower status really does not deserve much discussion, IMHO.
I completely agree!!! Considering the man's position and the issue at stake, at the very least some congressional attention is warranted i believe? Am i really so crazy to think so?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
I completely agree!!! Considering the man's position and the issue at stake, at the very least some congressional attention is warranted i believe? Am i really so crazy to think so?
No you are not the crazy one!

It's call "testimony " & "federal" employees gets "whistleblower" status because of giving info!!!

Crazy how some can't or won't read that "federal" employees fall into different categories & are threaded differently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
For those who actually want to read about the act that protects "federal" employees :eyesroll (I did post the link prior) here are some Q & A on it! Or you can stand on a soap box and think this isn't real!

A whole big act JUST for "federal" employees!

It's designed to get "federal" employees protection SO THAT THEY ARE NOT retaliated against! It "protects" the employee! One does NOT need to be retaliated against! There IS a difference between "whistleblowing" and "retaliation", some seem to think one must be retaliated against and that simply is NOT true!

Although whistleblower and retaliation claims are often discussed interchangeably, and claims brought by whistleblowers generally involve retaliation by an employer, there is a difference between the two types of claims.
http://www.workplacefairness.org/general-whistleblowing AGAIN, this "general" info, the higher up your position in the "federal" govt the different the claim and status becomes. Not all the fall under "whistleblower" end up testifying but when one clearly has enough info that would warrant "testimony" you do fall into a different category!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,027 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
Did you even read your own link? WHERE does it say that retaliation HAS to occur before applying for whistleblower protection?
Exactly!

IF the ONLY way one could have "whistleblower" status was by Tea's link there would have been NO need for congress to have written more acts to provide for "federal" employees!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
The below PDF contains the definition of protected whistleblowing, according to OSC. (It's only one short page so please read.) Retaliation is obviously prohibited under the act, meaning it is formally forbidden by law, due to the protected whistleblowing and then gives the definition of what falls under protected whistleblowing. Notice retaliation is not accepted "because of PROTECTED whistleblowing."

It also goes on to state that retaliation against government scientists who challenge censorship or make disclosures concerning the integrity of the scientific process if the censorship will cause one of the types of misconduct described in the PDF is also prohibited. (I'm not arguing further on whether Thompson is a whistleblower or not, or if he has whistleblowing status or immunity. He fulfills the criteria.)

https://osc.gov/Resources/post_wbr.pdf

The point of whistleblower protection acts is to encourage federal employees to speak out against government wrongdoing. Without protection in place from the start, the fear to speak out becomes too great, and that's not the idea.

With that said, however, the silence around the Thompson case is concerning. Concerns that the CDC is now attempting to iron this out behind the scenes, avoiding a congressional hearing, is starting to arise in my mind, or that even if a congressional hearing is brought, there is no guarantee he would be able to express his grievances entirely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,147 Posts
Well of course there is an huge attempt to cover this up and deny it.

Just as there is a huge attempt to cover up and deny injury from the HPV vaccines.

And another cover-up over harm from the Pentavalent vaccines being used in SE Asia.

Way back when the smallpox vaccine was widely used problems were being covered up and denied.

Seems to be standard operating procedure on vaccine injuries. There may even be a manual somewhere on how the cover-up should be managed :eek:

Slaps my hand! Whoops, conspiracy theory!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Did you even read your own link? WHERE does it say that retaliation HAS to occur before applying for whistleblower protection?
There is no "applying" for whistleblower protection for federal government employees. IF a federal government employee faces retaliation after disclosure, then the whistleblower protection comes into play. They do not claim whistleblower status "in abstract", as Dorit put it. Please find a provision that allows granting status of whistleblower to a federal employee?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
There is no "applying" for whistleblower protection for federal government employees. IF a federal government employee faces retaliation after disclosure, then the whistleblower protection comes into play. They do not claim whistleblower status "in abstract", as Dorit put it. Please find a provision that allows granting status of whistleblower to a federal employee?
In order to qualify for whistleblower protection, requirements must be met under the whistleblower protection program, and the individual is automatically protected by law against any possible retaliation if requirements are met. What is it that you aren't understanding? These whistleblowers are protected from retaliation BEFORE any retaliation occurs. If retaliation occurs, they file a claim. These laws were developed to encourage future whistleblowers to speak out against illegal activity, because firing employees for speaking out is too easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,027 Posts
Whistleblower disclosures can save lives as
well as billions of taxpayer dollars. They play
a critical role in keeping our government
honest, efficient and accountable.
Recognizing that whistleblowers root out
waste, fraud and abuse, and protect public
health and safety, federal laws strongly
encourage employees to disclose
wrongdoing. Federal laws also protect
whistleblowers from retaliation.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) plays
an important role in helping whistleblowers.
OSC is an independent agency. OSC protects
federal employees from “prohibited
personnel practices,” including whistleblower
retaliation and unlawful hiring
practices, such as nepotism. OSC also
provides an independent, secure channel for
disclosing and resolving wrongdoing in
federal agencies. This guide provides a
summary of whistleblower protections and
avenues available to employees to disclose
wrongdoing. For more information, please
visit OSC’s website at www.osc.gov.

where does it say retaliation must occur before whistleblower status is recognized?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
In order to qualify for whistleblower protection, requirements must be met under the whistleblower protection program, and the individual is automatically protected by law against any possible retaliation if requirements are met. What is it that you aren't understanding? These whistleblowers are protected from retaliation BEFORE any retaliation occurs. If retaliation occurs, they file a claim. These laws were developed to encourage future whistleblowers to speak out against illegal activity, because firing employees for speaking out is too easy.
Retaliation is a WHOLE other issue too!!! Many seem to lump the two as if they are the same! :grin: Imagine that!



I whole special act JUST for "federal" employees! I guess these needs to be repeated and repeated because it's not clear what this is! Saving lives and telling the truth and all the crap! -geezeeeeeeeeeeee :eyesroll
@teacozy why is that there is such an issue here? What are you so afraid of with whistleblower status, the truth? Does it hurt that much?

Why wouldn't PRO vaccers want this to release of ALL info?, oh, never mind, I think I DO know the real answer here! So keep harping on this status in hopes that you can get it to stick!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
You guys are the ones not getting it. There is no "granting" official whistleblower status for federal government employees. Like I said above, provide a source that shows a provision that allows granting status of whistleblower to a federal employee. A person makes disclosures of wrongdoing. If there are no retaliations, then there is nothing to protect against. The law protects those that blow the whistle vs retaliation. It's not an accredited title or something someone is "granted".

So non-vaxers and non-vax websites like Vactruth that say things like "Sources have confirmed that Dr. William Thompson (senior scientist at The CDC) has been granted Official Whistleblower Status and immunity" are just making it up for affect. http://vaxtruth.org/2015/02/dr-will...eblower-status-and-immunity-cdcwhistleblower/
 
61 - 80 of 198 Posts
Top