Coronavirus


Peter

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Jules Troy said:

Lying to a corrupt and repugnant government? Hell yes, not only would I lie to them, it’s the morally right thing to do.  I’d  also engage in any psyops activity to fuck them up/gaslight them at every opportunity.

Bet you that Pastor in Alberta would help you!!!!

At least they did not put him in jail 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it moral to tell the Government you have been vaccinated? Is it moral to tell a business like the owners of a plane or subway, that you have been vaccinated? Is it moral to tell a school representative that your kids have been vaccinated? Is it moral to tell someone that you know, love or cherish, that you have been vaccinated?

edit. 

Of course it is moral to lie to a Nazi demanding your papers and similar activities between a moral person and a criminal.

Ayn Rand: Did it ever occur to you, that there is no conflict of interests among men, neither in business nor in trade nor in their most personal desires if they omit the irrational from their view of the possible and destruction from their view of the practical? There is no conflict, and no call for sacrifice, and no man is a threat to the aims of another if men understand that reality is an absolute not to be faked, that lies do not work, that the unearned cannot be had, that the undeserved cannot be given, that the destruction of a value which is, will not bring value to that which isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

They don't.

--Brant

Are you trying to reassure Peter that he's safe from getting Covid because he's been "vaccinated"?

He isn’t.  The pseudo-vaccines don’t protect people from getting, or from dying from, Covid - as Marc accurately indicated in his full question, which you truncated.

Ellen

  • Smile 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the socio-economic level, here is some more garlic, mirrors, crosses and wooden stakes for the Coronavirus vampires in the castles.

The villagers are starting to win.

Michael

 

EDIT: The tweet embedded in the tweet has now been deleted. And Disclose.TV on Telegraph doesn't have a copy, so it was probably deleted for some reason by Disclose.TV itself.

At any rate, this is what the tweet was about:

Southwest-Airlines-AP.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
WWW.FOXBUSINESS.COM

Earlier this month, Southwest became the latest airline to require its employees to get inoculated by Dec. 8, although it still gave employees the option to apply for medical or religious exemptions.

Now let's hope that Fox Business doesn't delete this. :) 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a link but Tucker had a doctor on from St Lukes in Bethlehem Pa explaining how they will allow staff that were naturally infected and have cleared the virus a year deferment on vaccination.

Tucker asked him whether the CDC was looking at the same data sets as the hospital and came to a different conclusion and the doctor said that no one is looking at the same data sets and that that may be a lot of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Honesty does not mean that you owe an answer to any idle or impertinent question anyone chooses to ask you. You do not owe information to those who have no right, purpose or business to question you about matters which do not affect them. In such cases honesty consists of refusing to answer, not of lying...

But don't lower yourself to the status of a liar...the moral alternative is not: to tell the truth or lie, but to tell the truth or nothing."

N. Branden, Basic Principles.

("What is your bank balance?" "Did you have sex last night?" "Have you had your jab?")

All can and should be answerable with - "None of your business". (to anyone but good friends, concerned only for your welfare)

Except ... the right to privacy is not going to work with an employer/the state/'society' who claim your vaxx status IS their business, while refusing to reply in the negative (to lie) gives you away, and that's a moral indictment of the vaccination mandate scheme.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Are you trying to reassure Peter that he's safe from getting Covid because he's been "vaccinated"?

He isn’t.  The pseudo-vaccines don’t protect people from getting, or from dying from, Covid - as Marc accurately indicated in his full question, which you truncated.

Ellen

The protected aren't protected so the unprotected can't be protected thus don't get any category encompassed by protection qua the vaccines. "Protected" is a lie.

The unvaccinated may need protection from the vaccinated (and each other) with their spike proteins and mutated viruses.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/8/2021 at 12:23 PM, Ellen Stuttle said:

Thanks for the report.  What you say agrees with my cursory second-hand impression.

Ellen

Even if Dr. Mercola is a bit of a huckster (I'm not saying he is, and I don't think he's a quack) he's certainly doing good work these days.  See his

Businesses: $700,000 Fine for Not Complying With Vax Mandate

(The link is to a reprint because the original is up only temporarily.)

Recall that the folks at the so-called Ayn Rand Institute supported Biden over Trump, saying Trump was "authoritarian."  They are either flaming idiots or making fools out of their supporters.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Are you trying to reassure Peter that he's safe from getting Covid because he's been "vaccinated"?

He isn’t.  The pseudo-vaccines don’t protect people from getting, or from dying from, Covid - as Marc accurately indicated in his full question, which you truncated.

Ellen

I think we should give them some due, Ellen, apparently they do ~reduce~ the severity of the disease and the ~chance~ of fatality (for those who need it). BUT - the fact vaccines don't stop infection and transmission, is crumbling any altruistic rationale behind the vax mandate. The way it should always have been, one gets it or doesn't - by informed choice, for personal benefit and for those one cares for/has responsibility to - not for the social good.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Mandate" is now euphemistic and synonymous with career-ending, social pressure, psychological intimidation, Govt. coercion.  I think I'll stop using the word. This is vaxx blackmail.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, anthony said:

"Mandate" is now euphemistic and synonymous with career-ending, social pressure, psychological force, Govt. coercion.  I think I'll stop using the word. This is vaxx blackmail.

More to the point "mandate" is now a euphemism for mandate.

It's mandate de facto not de jure, large swaths of the 'public' fail to make the proper distinction and fall to the proverbial lemmings' fate. Along with power lust it seems to be a feature of human nature both of which John Galt wanted to reduce to a bug.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark said:

Even if Dr. Mercola is a bit of a huckster (I'm not saying he is, and I don't think he's a quack) he's certainly doing good work these days.  See his

Businesses: $700,000 Fine for Not Complying With Vax Mandate

(The link is to a reprint because the original is up only temporarily.)

Recall that the folks at the so-called Ayn Rand Institute supported Biden over Trump, saying Trump was "authoritarian."  They are either flaming idiots or making fools out of their supporters.

Looks most helpful. From a glimpse: The "elephant in the room", natural herd immunity, has indeed been ignored if not scorned (From the start). This makes one wonder if a country's health is *actually* what matters most. Or is it more, grabbing power, when the whole world is morally (etc.) uncertain, afraid and fragile? (Rhetorical).

Not an article by an ARI O'ist, shamefully. The ARI bunch have still not, that I'm aware, come out unequivocally against Vaxx blackmail, and YB hasn't admitted his blunder implicitly nor explicitly.  Instead has been doubling down, covering his tracks, from what I've heard. About ready for another pertinent ARIWatch column...?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anthony wrote: I think we should give them some due, Ellen, apparently they do ~reduce~ the severity of the disease and the ~chance~ of fatality. end quote

Excellent, and scientifically accurate, point. The “vaccination big picture” shows a huge drop in infections and fatalities. Areas with the fewest vaccinated people per capita have the most illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths from the Coronavirus. The American states with the most stubborn anti-vaxers have the most hospitalizations to such an extent that the Delta variant is still filling up ICU’s . . . and ticking off the medical staffs. In news interviews they call the anti vaxers stupid, irrational people.     

My personal “small picture” shows no one in my immediate area has gotten sick from the vaccine, other than an out of sorts feeling for a day. No locally vaccinated people I know or hear about have been hospitalized or died from Covid. The one ICU employee I personally know retired a week ago.

The medical science heavily if not totally leans towards vaccination, perhaps getting the flu shot now, and holding off on a third, booster shot for Covid. That consensus may not change as winter approaches. So what will you do? What does science and reason accept or expect as rational behavior? (I am not talking about people.) What will the majority of objectivists do? No pressure there except for the internet gullible, conspiracy theorists. I am not for mandates.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TMJ wrote: Along with power lust it seems to be a feature of human nature both of which John Galt wanted to reduce to a bug.

No disagreement there, though it would be better to see Covid as a minor bug, like the flu, with fewer consequences than the flu. The Chicago PD and so many other organizations are fighting Covid mandates . . . for this particular vaccine but they are not fighting against smallpox, tuberculosis, polio, etc. Why is this different? I would have to agree that while people had no choice about those “old shots” they used to have a choice about newer, less time tested shots. It has been two years since the Chinese unleashed this upon the world. We know who the vulnerable are.     

As I have said before my only big exception to institutional mask and vaccine mandates may be in the health care field. I went for a tooth cleaning yesterday and “as usual” the patient can’t wear a mask (open wide) but the dental hygienist certainly did.  

Time for a fake video for relaxation? What bugs me Y’all, is people searching the net for support of their bias and paying no mind to the doctor they may know. Here’s a little song I cribbed from Johnny Lee.

I was lookin' for science in all the wrong places
Lookin' for reason in too many faces
Searchin' their eyes
Lookin' for traces
Of what I'm dreamin' of
Hoping to find a doctor or a cover
I'll bless the day I discover
Another heart lookin' for irrationality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, That - "I am not for mandates" - takes priority for me. In return, I am for vaccinations.  A false dichotomy you're aware of.

We may argue "the science", but that's a separate matter.

As I've constantly said, vaccines are still better than nothing, at very least a fairly safe port in the storm, for us and all ageing (etc.) individuals. They apparently have enough efficacy for anyone who knows they need vaccinating or simply want it. In my case and having a pretty good metabolism and resistance to diseases - I've not had flu for as long as I can recall - and I'm sure I'd cope with Covid (if I've not already asymptomatically caught it) but growing older and undoubtedly, gradually getting immuno-compromised, my choice would have been to wait a year or so. This bug will be around for a while. That I won't be allowed a choice and freedom to decide, as with the healthful many who would do fine without vaxxing, is abhorrent. Covid and all the un-needed measures that were forced along with it, have lost us freedom.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anthony and Peter,

Not according to Dr. Peter McCullough.  In his recent talk
Winning the War Against Therapeutic Nihilism
he said that although vaccinated people who get Covid can be easier to treat, across all age groups statitically you are better off taking your changes with Covid rather than the vaccine.

The link above is to my abridgement of his talk.  The abridgement is less than an hour.  I removed a technical section that no one would understand and a few irrelvant asides.

People are unlikely to watch a video lasting more than an hour.  Consider giving out the abridgement link above rather than a link to the original Bitchute or Rumble.

This is an absolutely terrific talk and deserves wide distribution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With no analysis, I’m going to go out on a layman’s limb and guess that 1919 was ‘better’ than 1918. 

Akin to dying with/from covid , are ‘vaccines’ ‘working’ to protect or are the strains less ‘potent’? 

Leaky vaccines can/do provide opportunities for selection pressure   that lead to resistance , but selection pressures will or tend to favor selection for less virulent strains as the more host friendly an organism is the more toleration the host can sustain. 

All the bad numbers are trending down , who says the leaky vauxes have anything at all to do with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the boffins here, the results of studies in an article (co-authored with Peter McCullough). The intro and conclusion, in brief, argues for the superiority of natural immunity and against mandates on the healthy (e.g soldiers and children). While not being dismissive of the vaccines. An interesting item, survivors of the Spanish Flu had antibodies that lasted a lifetime.

 

https://trialsitenews.com/is-there-evidence-that-natural-exposure-immunity-to-covid-virus-is-similar-or-superior-to-vaccine-induced-immunity-and-should-we-force-mandate-these-vaccines-on-our-healthy-military-and-police/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Peter said:

TMJ wrote: Along with power lust it seems to be a feature of human nature both of which John Galt wanted to reduce to a bug.

No disagreement there, though it would be better to see Covid as a minor bug, like the flu, with fewer consequences than the flu. The Chicago PD and so many other organizations are fighting Covid mandates . . . for this particular vaccine but they are not fighting against smallpox, tuberculosis, polio, etc. Why is this different? I would have to agree that while people had no choice about those “old shots” they used to have a choice about newer, less time tested shots. It has been two years since the Chinese unleashed this upon the world. We know who the vulnerable are.     

As I have said before my only big exception to institutional mask and vaccine mandates may be in the health care field. I went for a tooth cleaning yesterday and “as usual” the patient can’t wear a mask (open wide) but the dental hygienist certainly did.  

Time for a fake video for relaxation? What bugs me Y’all, is people searching the net for support of their bias and paying no mind to the doctor they may know. Here’s a little song I cribbed from Johnny Lee.

I was lookin' for science in all the wrong places
Lookin' for reason in too many faces
Searchin' their eyes
Lookin' for traces
Of what I'm dreamin' of
Hoping to find a doctor or a cover
I'll bless the day I discover
Another heart lookin' for irrationality.

Wookin per nubbb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flu d'etat has zero to do with anything but compliance.

This is a world war, and has zero to do with anything but that.

Thats your starting point Peter, then everything else will fall in place.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Uttar Pradesh a part of India that compares in population to the 7-8 largest country, 241 Million people were treated with Ivermectin crushing SARS-CoV-2 while an adjacent state was crushed for not using it.

Merck holds the patent for the bacteria in Ivermectin. It doesnt want to repurpose a drug when it can push a higher cost Monupiravir. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Smile 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now