Loyalty oaths? Perhaps you haven't seen any. But perhaps you've simply missed what was right before your eyes.
There are different kinds of loyalty oaths. Some require you to publicly disavow what millions of Americans believe to be true.
Van Jones, green jobs advisor to the Obama administration, signed a 2004 petition calling for congressional hearings - as well as an investigation by the New York Attorney General - into "evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur." It didn't matter that John Farmer, dean of Rutgers Law School and former counsel of the 9/11 Commission published a book, The Ground Truth: The Untold Story of America Under Attack on 9/11, the same month Jones resigned. The book concluded, according to Publishers Weekly, "the official version of events was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue." Jones still had to recant and resign. The loyalty oath requires that you swallow the blue pill and accept the official version.
Bruce Ivins overdosed on tylenol after extensive browbeating, surveillance and harrassment of family members. Now the National Academy of Sciences is spending more government money to answer the wrong questions about the FBI's anthrax letters case ... a small price to pay, to give the NAS imprimatur to the FBI's failed investigation into the letters. Don't ask how and by whom Ivins was set up, and before him, Hatfill, Assaad and Mikesell. Don't ask about the fact there is no evidence to support a conviction. Don't ask who crafted and supervised this most bumbling of FBI investigations. Don't ask how so many complex assassinations of political leaders in this country have been carried out by lone nuts. Take the loyalty oath and agree that a "lone nut" sent the letters.
Do you know someone with a child that was perfectly normal, then over a couple of weeks faded into autism after a vaccine? Fuggedaboudit. If you are a medical professional you can question the safety of drugs, but you better not question the safety of vaccines. Just because the vaccine package inserts list adverse events doesn't mean they were caused by vaccines. You want smallpox coming back? Keep asking questions, and your career may just head south. Take the loyalty oath instead: it's a lot safer.
Got lyme disease? It went away after a 3 or 4 week treatment, right? Oh, it didn't? That means you must have something else.
You say your symptoms are the same as when it started? Are you sure you're not depressed? You may think you have lyme disease, but you don't. You say lyme bacteria take at least 12-24 hours to divide, unlike other bacteria that can divide in 20 minutes? Lyme bacteria live inside cells where antibiotics don't achieve high levels? Are you trying to tell me that tuberculosis bacteria take the same amount of time to divide, and they get treated for 9-12 months?
What are you, some kind of armchair microbiologist? Get a grip. Go see a pain doctor, and get some therapy. No doctor will treat you long-term anyway... didn't you hear that over 40 doctors who did offer prolonged treatments for lyme had the states go after their licenses? The docs learned to take the loyalty oath: now it's your turn. Where's that blue pill?
UPDATE: UK doctors and nurses also have to take a biologic loyalty oath: swine flu vaccine. According to the Guardian:
The Department of Health has ordered NHS bosses across England to ensure that frontline staff get immunised against swine flu amid growing signs that many doctors and nurses intend to shun the vaccine. Leading DH figures including Sir Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, have written to them six times in the last five weeks stressing the need for action before the second wave of the pandemic causes major problems... hospital chief executives have told the Guardian that they expect as few as 10%-20% of their staff to get vaccinated and cannot fulfill the DH's demands because the jabs, which are due to begin within days, are entirely voluntary.Why do I call this a loyalty oath? Because medical professionals who understand perfectly well there is no evidence the vaccine is safe or reasonably effective are being pressured to ignore their professional judgment and accept a potentially risky medical intervention. Presumably the goal is to set an example for the rest of the public.
Is the point simply to demonstrate the government's wisdom in embarking on the world's largest (and most unnecessary) vaccination program in history? The UK traditionally has not mandated vaccinations.