Vaccines - the more you read,. the bigger the scam you realize they are.
I now regret every vaccine I have ever taken (and I am sure I have voluntarily taken more in adult life than almost everyone I know due to travelling so much to "third world countries").
Thanks Big Pharma for your latest round of BS, you turned someone who was one of your pin cushions into a 100% anti-vaxxer.
Question, if I never took a Covid murder stab, does that still make me a Pureblood given what I just wrote? I sincerely hope so.
My understanding is that everything prior to the pfizertoxin was based on the traditional vaccine method. I.E. An attenuated live virus, inactivated, subunit etc.
This toxic brew is the only one (so far) that changes the DNA and causes the body to create it's own supply of poison.
There is a silver lining in all of this.
Billions of people are now awake to how evil the pharmaceutical companies are and how corrupt all of the government agencies are.
The thing about the letter is that it doesn’t challenge the belief that the government has the right to impose vaccines in the first place. It suggests the imposition would be okay if the vax were effective. That is giving up too much ground.
Great piece and I love the motivation and altruistic direction it is coming from. The children immunisation schedule is NOT about science, NOT about safety, NOT about protecting kids. It is about training parents to accept governmental interference and medical interventions, in decisions for their children. Its about training children to ignore their hurt/pain/intuition and to submit to the captured authority of medical establishment. Its about the medical industrial complex profits (which prior to 2020) were actually dropping), transitioning to a new business model and reviving their business. Now that the institution's, and public have accepted a "emergency" model of research, ie skipping large portions of clinical trials and documentation in lieu of speed (130 days now), pharma and DoD's around the world can continue their warmongering and go back to sky high profit margins with minimal accountability. With zero objections from their new lab rats-humans.
My only concern with this piece, particularly the age discrimation angle, is that by focusing on the children (which I completely support and understand why), your opening the door wider on the pharma/government suggested and previously proposed (but unable to get traction on), "adult immunisation schedule". Rather than scrapping or at least making the childhood schedule safe, they will finish creating a new adult schedule, to continue the profiteering. At least that's What I would do if I was a captured regulatory body and government, taking bribes and lobbying gratuities from the medico-industrialised-miltary-bureauratic tyrant, like those running things today🤪🤯🤗
I agree with your premise in general, as I do with most, if not all, of your well-considered and well-written articles. More particularly, I see it as something of a duty to push back against an overweening and increasingly obnoxious and intrusive administrative class and their unthinking minions.
There is one minor, perhaps slightly tangential point I would beg your indulgence in permitting me to make.
I reference this: “...and heavily reliant on BOTH incomes, you cannot afford for one of you to not work.”
I wonder if, more correctly stated, that might be “you cannot afford for one of you not to work *given the constraints of your “lifestyle” expectations*.”
I would go on to say that, in a so-called advanced nation, if you require two incomes for subsistence, then you are in a high-risk situation and perhaps should re-examine your underlying assumptions.
One such assumption, postulate even, is the subtle and pervasive notion that the measure of one’s worth is directly proportional to one’s capacity to consume. Social status, in many circles, is largely predicated on ostentation, and is pursued almost to the exclusion of the real satisfaction that comes from a simple life of love and service. Trinkets are elevated to the status of necessity, meaningless hedonism to a fundamental human right.
Not that I am suggesting that there is a universally correct answer, but maybe at least one real question surrounding unconscionable vaccine “mandates” is one of “how much of my lifestyle am I willing to sacrifice for the health and welfare of my children? What do I sacrifice for which?”
I can say that the US health agencies are chomping at the bit to create adult mandates. While I agree with the reasoning behind the letter, I fear this kind of thing just puts that idea on the front burner...
Vaccines - the more you read,. the bigger the scam you realize they are.
I now regret every vaccine I have ever taken (and I am sure I have voluntarily taken more in adult life than almost everyone I know due to travelling so much to "third world countries").
Thanks Big Pharma for your latest round of BS, you turned someone who was one of your pin cushions into a 100% anti-vaxxer.
Question, if I never took a Covid murder stab, does that still make me a Pureblood given what I just wrote? I sincerely hope so.
Yes, they are all fraudulent and “unavoidably dangerous” according to 1986 vaccine act!
I think you are correctly defined as a pureblood.
My understanding is that everything prior to the pfizertoxin was based on the traditional vaccine method. I.E. An attenuated live virus, inactivated, subunit etc.
This toxic brew is the only one (so far) that changes the DNA and causes the body to create it's own supply of poison.
There is a silver lining in all of this.
Billions of people are now awake to how evil the pharmaceutical companies are and how corrupt all of the government agencies are.
The thing about the letter is that it doesn’t challenge the belief that the government has the right to impose vaccines in the first place. It suggests the imposition would be okay if the vax were effective. That is giving up too much ground.
Great piece and I love the motivation and altruistic direction it is coming from. The children immunisation schedule is NOT about science, NOT about safety, NOT about protecting kids. It is about training parents to accept governmental interference and medical interventions, in decisions for their children. Its about training children to ignore their hurt/pain/intuition and to submit to the captured authority of medical establishment. Its about the medical industrial complex profits (which prior to 2020) were actually dropping), transitioning to a new business model and reviving their business. Now that the institution's, and public have accepted a "emergency" model of research, ie skipping large portions of clinical trials and documentation in lieu of speed (130 days now), pharma and DoD's around the world can continue their warmongering and go back to sky high profit margins with minimal accountability. With zero objections from their new lab rats-humans.
My only concern with this piece, particularly the age discrimation angle, is that by focusing on the children (which I completely support and understand why), your opening the door wider on the pharma/government suggested and previously proposed (but unable to get traction on), "adult immunisation schedule". Rather than scrapping or at least making the childhood schedule safe, they will finish creating a new adult schedule, to continue the profiteering. At least that's What I would do if I was a captured regulatory body and government, taking bribes and lobbying gratuities from the medico-industrialised-miltary-bureauratic tyrant, like those running things today🤪🤯🤗
We are dealing with murdering criminals!
I agree with your premise in general, as I do with most, if not all, of your well-considered and well-written articles. More particularly, I see it as something of a duty to push back against an overweening and increasingly obnoxious and intrusive administrative class and their unthinking minions.
There is one minor, perhaps slightly tangential point I would beg your indulgence in permitting me to make.
I reference this: “...and heavily reliant on BOTH incomes, you cannot afford for one of you to not work.”
I wonder if, more correctly stated, that might be “you cannot afford for one of you not to work *given the constraints of your “lifestyle” expectations*.”
I would go on to say that, in a so-called advanced nation, if you require two incomes for subsistence, then you are in a high-risk situation and perhaps should re-examine your underlying assumptions.
One such assumption, postulate even, is the subtle and pervasive notion that the measure of one’s worth is directly proportional to one’s capacity to consume. Social status, in many circles, is largely predicated on ostentation, and is pursued almost to the exclusion of the real satisfaction that comes from a simple life of love and service. Trinkets are elevated to the status of necessity, meaningless hedonism to a fundamental human right.
Not that I am suggesting that there is a universally correct answer, but maybe at least one real question surrounding unconscionable vaccine “mandates” is one of “how much of my lifestyle am I willing to sacrifice for the health and welfare of my children? What do I sacrifice for which?”
I can say that the US health agencies are chomping at the bit to create adult mandates. While I agree with the reasoning behind the letter, I fear this kind of thing just puts that idea on the front burner...