It's funny. Throughout my life, I have received more vaccinations than I can recall.
My children have received all the vaccines they need.
Every animal I own or have owned has always been fully vaccinated.
As a result of traveling to certain regions, I have even been vaccinated against things most people won't ever encounter.
As an example; before making my way through Mexico to Panama, I was (for safety) vaccinated against Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Malaria, Rabies, Yellow fever, and Typhoid.
I am currently 56 years old and I have supported vaccines my entire adult life (with exemptions) people should always have the right to choose.
It would have to be a possible extinction-level event before I would agree with any kind of forced injections or any other medical procedure being forced on someone.
???That is what fascists and communists do, and I am neither.
Now, recently we got hit with the C-bug and all of the BS that came with it. I think everyone knows what I am talking about.
And then of course C-bug+, C-bug++, C-bug++++, you get the idea.
(POINT of INTEREST). I feel like I am a rock star back in the 60s trying to write my lyrics in code so "the man" will not censor me. I thought we were supposed to be going forward, you know progressive. This sure seems a lot like we are going backward, seems pretty damn REgressive to me.
(People might want to file that away and give it some serious thought later.)
This is where we need to separate ourselves from politics and emotional reactions, focus on logic and critical thinking, but most of all common sense.
Part of this process is learning how to compartmentalize things as we go so that we can minimize the distraction that emotional reactions or irrelevant arguments (noise) can cause.
Now, there is, of course, a lot of emotion attached to this subject and I do mean a lot of them and they can be very intense at times which is exactly why we need to set them aside. This in no way diminishes their importance it simply moves their position in the queue.
)1 We should first figure out the logistics of a problem and come up with a way to solve it using logic and critical thinking.
)2 Then we view it using emotional thought to discover what if any negative impacts on the human population's quality of life etc. exist.
)3 Then we go back to logic and critical thinking to solve those human issues we just discovered.
As the saying goes "there is a place for everything and everything in its place".
That is how we all run our lives to one degree or another so why would we run our mind and thought processes any differently?
It is a known fact that trying to use both of these methodologies at the same time only results in frustration for a very good reason.
I mean, as good as I am, even I have not accomplished the ability to be both focused and distracted at the same time.
Know what I mean?
(File 2)
So to recap, we have established that just because I question 1 (very questionable) "vaccine" out of the dozens I have had given to myself, my children, and my animals along with 35+ years of my life supporting vaccines and vaccination programs hardly makes me an anti-vaxxer in the real world where I live anyway.
It is an unfounded smear meant simply to attack my credibility and make me a target of further harassment by the fascist mob.
As it is for every person who does not fall into lockstep with the Marxists agenda.
Tell me again, who is it again that makes up that fascist mob?
So why do I question this one injection? Red Flags man, red flags.
There are an infinite amount of questions but the following ones I focused on first and they led me into asking so many more questions I eventually got around to all of them.
When I pull a thread I do not stop pulling until I reach the end.
GOOD NEWS! You don't have to do that, you only have to go as far as it takes for you to be convinced by your own standards what the truth is. I just like to be thorough, which minimizes the chances that I overlooked something.
RED FLAG 1- Why did/do the media and politicians work so hard to coordinate their efforts to censor and discredit any person, study, or report posing a challenge to the official narrative being forced on people through the very same censorship and personal attacks?
Even the Press Secretary acknowledged that the current administration is working WITH social media platforms in order to censor private citizens and control the information that is allowed to be consumed.
(Listen. This is just 1 clip, there are dozens out there where they are telling us that they want to censor everything ) I won't play this during my video, you can find it in the text below.
FACT: By their own admission they are trying to deny the population (meaning US.) any information that THEY do not proclaim as the truth. We must listen to them and them alone, anything else is considered unacceptable, dissent, dangerous, and their misled minions will attack anybody in any way necessary that the media tells them to. Think "cancel culture"
Let's take a quick listen to just how far the Marxists have taken things into flat-out fascism in New Zealand.
This all sounds very familiar.
( POINT OF INTEREST and clarification ) Text
This is a form of fascism.
It does not matter one iota whether it is coming from the left or the right, that is irrelevant for our purposes because there is no left fascism or right fascism, there is simply fascism and the people doing it are fascists.
Invading political opponents rallies and meetings in order to disrupt them.
Screaming over the speakers, verbally and physically attacking people attending in order to intimidate them and break up the gathering.
This has been a very popular tactic over the last 5 years, especially on liberal-controlled college campuses where anyone who is not completely ensconced into their collectivism is not welcome.
Tell me again who as a matter of (documented fact) was it that was/are doing all of that?
How about using the mob to intimidate voters and anyone who opposes or questions the powers that be through targeted harassment of lies, hit pieces, and smear campaigns spread through society by the media as propaganda.
Going so far as attacking people's businesses, their personal lives in an attempt to destroy their lives in any and every way possible. All to silence their voices.
This was another favorite tactic over the last few years. Tell me again who as a matter of (documented fact) was/is it that was doing all of that?
If you want to truly identify a fascist you go and look at what fascists did, their actions, not their propaganda because they did ALL of the stuff going on today.
Specifically, look up their propaganda campaigns, look up "The Brown Shirts" of Germany and the "Black Shirts" of Italy, then compare them to those mentioned above, what some people call "cancel culture".
Look at how ANTIFA and the BLM (organization) (who are admitted Marxists by the way) operate, look at their methodology, and make the comparison for yourself. You will have to be open-minded and honest with yourself though.
For clarification.
We must remember that our enemy is not the Democrats, independents, libertarians, or Republicans.
We all have the same enemy and their greatest achievement so far is in keeping us all fighting each other so we do not realize that we all have the same enemy, we must stop fighting each other and unite against that common enemy, Marxism.
Marxists and their misled masses are all of our true enemies.
Another GIANT red flag for me was why did they change the definition of a vaccine and the word vaccination to accommodate this new injection? (Giant neon flashing Red Flag)
Social media is calling bluff on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for modifying its definition of the words “vaccine” and “vaccination” on its website.
Before the change, the definition for “vaccination” read, “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
Now, the word “immunity” has been switched to “protection.”
The term “vaccine” also got a makeover.
The CDC’s definition changed from “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease”
to the current “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”
Some people have speculated that the unannounced changes were the CDC’s attempt to hide the fact "C-bug" vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing "c-----virus" infection. U.S. Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said in a popular tweet the CDC has “been busy at the Ministry of Truth.”
However, a CDC spokesperson told McClatchy News the “slight changes in wording over time … haven’t impacted the overall definition.”
Exactly what are you expecting them to say, "Oh yeah, our changing the definition is confusing the hell out of everyone and we most definitely need to change it back".
Note the source; The Miami Herald, a company no one could in their wildest dreams call a conservative organization.
Really? Then why are there still people insisting that the injection will prevent infection and stop the spread of the C-bug even after the "EXPERTS" have admitted that they do no such thing?
Why are people constantly arguing with me that it is I who do not understand how vaccines work because... "vaccines simply protect you from having serious symptoms, being hospitalized or dying from the disease, they don't keep you from catching it."
Umm, yeah, up until 2020 immunity is EXACTLY what a vaccine did by its definition.
it gave people IMMUNITY against ever contracting the disease (or seriously minimizing the chances of contracting) a disease.
There are always exceptions to everything.
Note: (Opinion) The whole preventing serious symptoms, hospitalizations, and deaths? I would sure like to know how they claim to be verifying that.
Because the way I see it unless patient X contracts the disease both before and after getting the injection so that there is a dual data stream to compare the 2 events.
There is no way in hell it can be proclaimed as verified through scientific methodology.
Not to mention the thousands of variables that could never be accounted for even if we DID have dual data streams for each individual to compare.
Models, which are little more than educated guesses won't cut it. Not for me anyway nor most of the people I know. We require PROOF which is in my book actually following the science.
So let's do a quick review. They have to change the definition of both a vaccine and vaccination after over 220 years or so to accommodate an experimental injection that does not even BEGIN to meet the criteria for informed consent as defined by "a certain code" because no one knows what is in it. Plus, the mRNA technology has never been applied like this with human beings which is absolutely the very definition of being EXPERIMENTAL.
(Not to mention that the injections until very recently meaning during the time period I am speaking of were only covered under a EUA (emergency use authorization) which means the fact-checkers can lie all they want and claim that the C injections are NOT experimental which is why they say that "certain code" does not apply here as far as forced injections go.
Well, let's just take a look at the requirements for being granted a EUA right from the FDA website.
So what is an experiment? An experiment is a controlled procedure designed to test a hypothesis.
The hypothesis is that these chemicals/drugs will help prevent infection (or in this case "protection") from the C-bug but since there is no scientific proof of this it can not be fully approved until there is.
There needs to be a controlled procedure (EXPERIMENT) to verify that this cocktail will IN FACT work. That is where the EUA comes in.
So by the FDA's own definition, these C-bug injections are in fact experimental, so we need to waste no more time on whether or not the injections are experimental because we just proved that they are.
Now, armed with this new verified information we can get back to our primary question, Why are they doing it, what is the end goal? That is always the primary question.
Earlier I said that these questions opened up paths to many more questions for me is because of one simple thing.
I had just proved to myself that these people have been lying to me, not just by omission but outright lying to me.
1) Question I asked myself, "why are they lying to me about this?"
2) Question I asked myself, "what the hell else have they been lying to me about?"
This is where next time we add another element to our thought process so that we can quickly narrow down motives and outcomes.
Cause and effect.
Remember though, at this point we still want to keep our emotions out of it, concentrate on the facts and the facts alone.
Note: I always found that in between doing my logical analysis was a good time to do any analysis of my emotional reactions to this topic so that it would be easier to set them aside the next time.
Sorry, the emotional side of things is not my area other than how I can apply it to logic and reason which is by all accounts a rather shortlist.
I am out, see y'all next time.
Comments