The CDC director, news pundits, commentators, the whole premise was baked into an assumption that "the virus stops at those vaccinated" they're gaslighting super hard now.
My eldest sister went even further... She blamed the unvaccinated for the rise of vaccine escape variants like omicron.
"My point is that if vaccine uptake had been more rapid and widespread, then variants like omicron would not have occurred."
And this is a woman whose job title is "Independent Research Consultant". She is charged with checking medical studies to ensure all protocols are met and the study is regulation compliant.
A special kind of ignorance, one that is supported by education and intellectualism. I call this institutionalized ignorance: the teaching of invalid, contradictory concepts that undermine the ability to see the obvious.
I would love to discuss all these points with her, but she has stopped speaking on the subject, at least with me. I think she wishes there were do-overs in life
I'm pretty sure two of my brothers aren't speaking to me. They'll acknowledge birthday and holiday texts, but I haven't seen them in over two years...and we live within 30 minutes of each other. This plandemic has broken many friendships and family relationships. We can only hope time will heal us.
My daughter will respond to texts but won't talk on the phone or Zoom and when she came to stay with her father the last time I had to be away, made sure she arrived a few hours after I had left and returned home several hours before I got back.
At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if this has morphed from distancing from her unclean, wrong-thinking, anti-vaxx mother to avoiding facing up to the mounting evidence she's been wrong. My grandson tells me she's way too deep in the matrix to see the bits of reality that are breaking through on even the most highly guarded mainstream media, but I'm hoping she's waking up.
I was talking with a friend today whose relationship with her daughters is similarly strained, and we agreed that what these criminals have done to our most precious relationships is as abominable a crime as the deaths and injuries they've inflicted.
My response to her and my family was simple. If the vaccine provided sterilising immunity like real vaccines, then you would be right but the manufacturer never made that claim and reality and time proved that true
I've read that. Others like the Ethical Skeptic believe Omicron was already in circulation, possibly for several years, and rose to dominance aided by the jabs. Both seem plausible to me.
My husband claims the same thing…it’s got to be in the propaganda somewhere that I haven’t seen …and logic be damned…the same man understands that you must take all of your penicillin to prevent superbugs but cannot translate similar logic to the shots, which to me is the easiest, lay-person way to relate it (and neither of us have a strong scientific background, so easy to understand stuff is what we need)
I tried to use an analogy to illustrate the absurdity of shutdowns, lockdowns and isolation dictates in a discussion on 2020: "it's like preventing sudden infant death by drowning babies at birth" which as you might imagine didn't go over well.
I had to explain I wasn't advocating drowning babies at birth (really) and the point is that unless we evaluate the consequences of our actions fully, the outcome really isn't good. I stopped using analogies...and having risk/reward conversations with most people.
BTW did have one person respond "if you prevent the birth through birth control or early abortion, you don't have to worry about SIDS" and not being sarcastic. Another level of scary that this kind of thing is OK to say in public but questioning risk/reward of a drug isn't.
It's really dispiriting when people come out with those non-sequiters that show how completely differently they're recieving what you're saying, how divorced your realities are.
It's very difficult not to just quit the conversation when you realise they're still 7 storeys further back down the chain of reasoning, and the elevator is probably not working too well.
back when "the science" of climate change started it's assent away from fact-based, logically consistent observation based science, I knew a lot of professional scientists and engineers who 'signed on' despite the obvious inconsistencies and stopped asking the wrong questions because they realized it was necessary to continue to work: to get funding, and get published, etc. You'd have a couple beers (or shots of tequila) and they'd readily admit it was BS but what are you gonna do when you've seen what happens to those who question it.
That's a decade or more ago (maybe 2 by now?) and what is alarming is that this "the science is settled" is now believed by so many who will then accept repression of "the deniers" when even that label should be a red flag to anyone studied in science. A consequence of this new culture of suppression of inquiry, I fear, is a new kind of "dark ages" limiting progress in the sciences because we can not overcome the burdens and boundaries of established convention (which has always been needed to advance beyond those boundaries).
"The vaccine protects us from the disease". When we get the disease "but I didn't die because the vaccine made it less severe". And then "the vaccine protects me from the original virus, not the variants, which is why I took two booster doses of the same vaccine". Finally "I got sick because of those mean, ignorant uneducated vax deniers" who's physiology somehow defeat the vaccine I took....
It just seems to get deeper and deeper, and yes, people who really should know better suspend all basic sensibility to follow the dictates of The Party in which they believe.
I don't know much about the Jehovah's Witness religion, but I am quite familiar with the religion of The Party and secularism, which seem to be link such that each requires the other.
The inherent conflict of secularism is that it exhibits all the negative traits of a religion that the average secularist or athirst claim are why they have rejected traditional religions. It requires fanatical dedication to the cause, unwavering faith in the "church" (party) leadership, and unquestioning loyalty. This leads to amazing things, like self-proclaimed liberals who are completely intolerant of anyone expressing a different view, who must demonize all that do not conform, and can't even consider an alternate explanation or allow even asking questions perceived to challenge their desired narrative "deniers", demonstrating closed minds to any alternate possibilities. And even more amazing things like these same people explaining why free speech is bad and self-identified Jews endorsing disarmament, and suppression of political opponents using extreme measures like declaring them insurrectionists and imprisoning them without due process of law.
See logic 101 above: if you believe in the vaccine, the logically the unvaccinated affect only other unvaccinated. To conclude that unvaccinated harm vaccinated people we must logically conclude the vaccine is ineffective. The only way to resolve this logical inconsistency is redefine what is expected from a vaccine...but even that is illogical.
So we cling to irrational explanations: "I got the plague but didn't die because I had the vaccine" . Just a start...
This was step 1. Needed to establish the value as so overwhelming that any risk was acceptable. Prerequisite to this was "unprecedented" fear (based mostly on un-factual assumptions and assertions). This virus will KILL YOU and all you love. step 2 is capitalize on the fear. There are so many ways to capitalize on irrational fear.
Yep. Want to have some fun? If you can contrive to have a captive audience of these people, show them videos of these experts saying this. It is really something to see the expressions on their faces.
PFIZER HAD TO HAVE KNOWN.. they had to have known it would not stop infection.
the shot makes the recepient generate a serum ( blood) IgG anti body response only. but the antibody that is responsible for preventing infection and spread is the IgA isotype found in the nasal mucosa. SO this shot would never have stopped infection. If it reduced the severity of the illness in those who were at risk and the safety profile was favorable then maybe it would have made sense to give it to at risk people. but there was never any change of herd immunity with this shot.
AND PFIZER HAD TO HAVE KNOWN THIS. because the vax industry has tried for decades to some up with a sterilizing shot for viral upper respiratory infections like covid and influenza in people and even pigs and chickens and they failed repeatedly.
So Pfizer knew and they obfuscated and lied and pretended like they didnt have time to study it and acted like it wasnt an important aspect of the vax when really it was the KEY to whole pandemic.
Pfizer did this because they knew that everyone would need boosters indefinitely and that meant big bucks. Like putting people on a subscription plan without them knowing. Or like what purdue pharma did with oxycontin.
thats right . And mechanistically the vax doenst induce IgA, no agent has ever worked to stop spread of viral upper respiratory infections. When people ask " why havent they produced A cure for the common cold?" Well... there's a reason, Pfizer knew it wouldnt stop infection and did either actively promoted the lie that it would or failed to publically correct the errors or misunderstanding of politicians and public health people. Fauci must have known as well. if he didnt that makes him ignorant and incompetent. If he did know and lied then that makes him evil. So fauci is either ignorant, incompetent or evil or some combo of all three
I'm glad someone else recognizes the need for IgA to fight a respiratory virus. The shots mainly stimulated IgG - which indicates they were stimulating a memory response - but IgG mainly fights infection in the blood, not lungs. They also didn't significantly stimulate T-cell function that would be an earlier line of defense against a viral infection than antibodies would.
Fauci is both ignorant and incompetent - there is no question there. As for evil? Perhaps some barkless beagles could weigh in on that.
Exactly - you can't vaccinate against a respiratory virus and prevent infection w/o inducing an immune response at the site of infection (as you said likely primarily including T-cells!). This was/is a 100% known fact - something I think many of us non-virologists/vaccinologists came to understand over 1 1/2 years ago.
Anyway, not sure they will be sterilizing, but there are a few interesting intranasal/oral IgA (and T cell) inducing vaccines fairly far along in development.
Bharat BioTech (India) developed inCovacc which was licensed from Washington University (St Louis). It's an adenovirus, spike-based vaccine recently approved - as a primary series - in India, with another phase 3 completed as a booster. Not much of the phase 3 human trial data is publicly released yet, though in previous trials it was seemingly successful in preventing transmission in rhesus macaques. Bharat's US partner (Ocugen) for Covaxin (whole virion vaccine) has also licensed the vaccine from Wash U to commercialize it in the US (& EU/Japan).
Vaxart also has oral vaccines which are similarly adenovirus based (a spike-only and a spike/n-protein version) and Codagenix (and Serum Institute of India) is developing a live attenuated intranasal vaccine.
May all be too little too late, but it is interesting how these options were not pulled forward during 'Warp Speed' when they were clearly in development at the time - especially so when all we seemed to hear from big pharma was that they took no warp speed $ (so what did it go towards???).
It is definitely plausible that Pfizer didn't have the data until after the "field trial" on the general public. Given that the EUAs bypassed the normal process of clinical studies.
The subsequent suppression of data, that's another story. It could be a best seller - lies, intrigue, corruption, murder, ... all it lacks is a hero :-(
They released the trial data that 'proved' the 95% efficacy, and THAT DATA ITSELF proved the jab doesn't stop transmission, considering they only measured people who got sick. That's not how vaccines work (or wasn't back then!)
How does one demonstrate efficacy in such a trail? Give 100 people the vaccine, then expose all 100 to the virus, and see who get's sick? Then do the same with 100 people who did not receive the vaccine, to establish a control with which to compare the effect. While 100 people wouldn't be mathematically valid to generalize to a population of 7 billion, and there are ethical issues with intentionally infecting people.
I've read some clinical trials of other drugs that follow the control model, with volunteers - people who are already sick and usually untreatable. That sort of control can show a difference between no meds and meds in treating a condition, but how does one validate prevention of a condition? From the literature it seems typically a lot of ad-hoc methods masquerading as science are used. I didn't see data on the pre-release clinical trial because what I found on the FDA site made it look like there was none prior to the EUA.
Yes, yes and yes. Putting infected elderly in nursing homes in order to spread the virus and increase the body count was a move that they hoped would not raise much suspicion. And if old folks die, who cares, right? They lived their lives. IMO, ventilators and Remdesivir (along with the lack of early treatment prohibited by the FDA) killed far more people than the virus itself ever did. One of the worst pieces of fallout from this entire charade is that we’ll never know for sure what the actual death rate is for SARS CoV-2, and how many deaths would have, could have and should have been prevented, which is something that the elite (including Fauci) never wanted us to know.
Not to mention the financial incentives for hospitals to identify, "Treat", and kill as many people as possible. Gotta give these guys credit for effort.
It doesn’t stop there. They also incentivized morticians who were paid a bonus (of sorts) to embalm corpses of those who died of (or with) COVID. And to discourage families from reporting all of this, they were dangled a $9000 carrot to help pay the final expenses of their dead. Kind of like hush money. You have no idea the number of funeral directors and family members called to request that I “correct” death certificates that I had signed, to include COVIDas the cause (or at least a contributing factor) in the death of their meal ticket...er, I mean “loved one”.
Whoa! I never heard about that $9000 funeral expense payoff. But even more interesting is your experience with funeral directors requesting that you change the cause of death on death certificates. I hadn't heard about that either. Thanks for reporting that.
If by that you mean to blame one of the two named political parties, look closer.
Plenty of politicians identifying as republicans played along with this. There really is only one dominant party (The Party) with few outliers (e.g. Rand Paul) but most just part of the theatre. 46 state and 2 US territories implemented essentially identical "shutdown and lock-in" orders, clearly crafted by the national party. 22 of those governors were republicans.
AFAIK the effects of the vaccine know no political affiliations.
Oh hell yes, both parties have crap for brains so called reps who are after money..and then prestige...and then power. Look at the Turtle (McConnell).
I want him triple jabbed and boosted twice and not with saline.
Do we all realize that everyone today who is in politics is in it for the $$$$...they all go in with nothing and come out multimillionaires. I am fed to the back teeth with the corruption and self dealing.
And it is just the beginning, I fear. I do not feel that it is a coincidence that the "assisted suicide/right to die" movement started about the same time that the first rumbles were heard about social security/medicare going broke. Expect to see more of this sort of thing.
FWIW, I have a friend who managed some of the CV clinical trials for Pfi$er. We no longer can talk about her job, but this is what she said last summer, before Paxlovid:
"The only way to stop CV was with a vaccine. If we didn't put one out, millions of people would have died, since vaccination is the ONLY treatment."
Pfizer certainly knew they hadn't tested for transmission, but we all did. The Stage 3 trials were conducted for two months during a time when viral transmission was low. Since the jabs induce IgG antibodies (blood) and not IgA antibodies (mucosal), the jabbed were always going to "catch" covid. The question was if they would become ill. Since they skipped the animal trials (in which challenge is permitted), they may not have known if the jabbed would become very ill with high viral loads that would enhance transmission. It's amazing what they didn't find when they didn't look for it. My guess is that Pfizer will try to pass blame on the FDA (well, they let us do it...so it's not our fault). They're all to blame.
Change Pfizer in your statements to darpa/batfa/dod...and you will have it nailed correctly. Pfizer etc were only working under thrir direction...this entire thing was a trial of the us' s ability to develop a vaccine for a bioweapin and they didnt give a shot if it worked or not. It was just a proof of concept e excercise...
I've always thought that it was an imperfect two part bioweapon: the virus was released to make people take the bioweapon. IMHO, it hasn't worked the way they wanted it to work.
Nah, it's worse than "they had to have known". There's no way they could possibly have known, because they never even tested for it before shoving it down the public's throat, making claims they knew they couldn't prove.
Pfizer knew that the vaccine would not generate IGA and generate heard immunity. They knew that it would fail to provide sterilizing immunity Pfizer knew that it would fail to prevent infection and spread. And they lied about this and misrepresented this on purpose so that they could sell booster after booster
I thought I had heard at the start, that in the telescoped trials, they had already moved on with the next steps when it became apparent that the monkeys they were testing on, got sick. From that they could know that it wasn't going to work. But apparently they didn't care or rather, like someone said, that failure was what they needed for their "subscription plan". Really, just like the earlier computer Antivirus subscriptions. What an uncanny similarity here, too.
Or there was just so much political and peer pressure to push through with the development of this thing. Imagine being in a board room or committee meeting during the phases of development of the vaccine. And it became evident that it wouldn’t stop infection or spread but they were halfway through rolling this thing out and their prestige and a huge amount of money was on the line. No one had the guts to speak up
Sadly, this reminds me of the religion of my family (which I left in 1984). Once people rise in their church offices to paid “general authorities” in the church’s corporate offices, at least some of them figure out it is all made up, not true. But they are so invested in it, besides having left high paying careers as lawyers, doctors, businessmen, that they have to sit there in silence, and worse, give “faith promoting” speeches to believing members who suspect nothing. That corruption is everywhere and it is very sad to know it. Sad to see so many people duped. Can’t say anything because most don’t want to know (as my scientist father told me re the church). Trying to tell people who don’t want to know is like teaching a pig to sing: it is impossible and it just frustrates you and the pig.
Also, they needed these vaccines approved no matter what, in order to them be able use the mRNA platform for everything else. So, in view of that more important agenda it was irrelevant whether the vaccines worked or not. (This being the pharma agenda, while the involved oligarchs and state actors were/are in addition to that, pursuing specific other agendas.)
And how would they know that if they never tested for it? They may have suspected it, they may have believed that, but without testing for it they most certainly did not *know* that it wouldn't.
This type of mRNA therapy is injected into a persons arm and stimulates the body to produce IgG serum (blood antibodies) and then , later on it was hoped memory T cells
This type of mRNA therapy would not cause the body to create a mucosal IgA response. The IGA antibodies are exclusively secreted in the respiratory mucosa and in the intestines
This are basic infectious disease and immunology facts that have been known for decades
There have been many times in the past when various groups have tried to produce these types of treatments and vaccines for animals that are raised for food like chickens and pigs, and they have all failed to produce neutralizing or sterilizing immunity that would prevent infection and spread. They have all failed to produce herd immunity
So based on decades of worldwide experience with these types of therapies Pfizer and Moderno and many other people had to have known that this particular Covid shot would not produce sterilizing heard immunity because it does not produce the IGA mucosal response
So they didn’t need to test for it. Because they knew that it wouldn’t produce herd immunity. They knew that it probably wouldn’t prevent infection spread and transmission. And that is specifically why they didn’t test for it because they knew that if they did test for it would show that it did NOT prevent infection
So they LIED about it and marketed it anyway and pushed it KNOWING it would probably not stop infection and spread
They lied because their was so much political pressure AND they knew they could sell it any endless booster
You understand:
They didn’t test because they knew it would probably fail the test. And if it failed the test no one would take it. So they wouldn’t be able to sell it. So they didn’t test, and they lied about it knowing it would probably fail the test, and now they can sell endless boosters
You see it’s a giant mindfuck, global worldwide historic fraud and crime against humanity
Very clearly put. They did know, because they've been attempting to make this technology work for years. This was pure opportunism.
The global situation was contributed to by many powerful players, with possibly slightly different motivations. The pharmaceutical arm is the easiest to understand.
I'm still amazed at the booster craze. Another level of logical denial. (1) the vaccine works but the virus mutates and (2) more of the same vaccine is the solution. (1) is shown true with flu viruses, but if that's the explanation for why the vaccine isn't protecting you, then more of the same makes no sense. And yet...it seems fairly obvious that having achieved 90% uptake rates in the most populous states, boosters create a "start over fresh" market opportunity (sell more of the same stuff). Second order logical inconsistency: big corporations are evil, greed driven organisms, and none more evil than drug companies, so believe everything the drug companies say and get the next shot.
I know idiots who are still telling me the reason there is no herd immunity is because I am unvaccinated while in the same breath denying that the vax was supposed to stop the spread. If they can't see the insanity in that there is no hope for them.
CDC changed the definition of herd immunity when people started refusing the jab... it was always when the majority had had the disease & had natural immunity, you had reached herd immunity. The CDC changed it to say that herd immunity is achieved only when the majority are vaxxed.
Yes, I remember this and it was a HUGE red flag when Fauci went from saying we need 70% vax uptake for herd immunity and then a week later says, actually we need 90%+ vax uptake for herd immunity. During that same time the CDC and the media were repeating the same line that natural immunity now suddenly means nothing, that it no longer exists and I was like, WTH is going on?
We were literally forced (hahahahha they tried) to get vaccinated on the premise that it would stop the spread. We supposedly had to get vaccinated to save grandmom.
Nope.
We’re NOT allowing you cocksuckers to gaslight us in this one.
I remember some very pointed questions in the beginning, demanding to know if it stopped transmission. It seemed like an odd thing to fixate on at the time, because of course that’s what vaccines do, right? Now we get it. Now we know. And we know more than they intended for us to learn about a bunch of other vaccines, too.
Well, a good chunk of what they’d have us believe about vaccines in general was always flimsy and based on the success of one or two vaccines. But they wanted to apply it to all vaccines. So saying “all” vaccines are safe and effective is like saying all painkillers work the same, from aspirin to opioids.
Honestly, having to defend this at this point is ludicrous. Everything about this “vaccine” was about preventing spread. So were the mandates and shaming. If pharma and the masses are denying this now we have bigger problems than we ever knew.
The legacy of the vaccine fanatics is that you can show them evidence of their wrongdoings and falsehoods they promoted and they will shrug it off or even worse, double down on the lies. It’s truly breathtaking the arrogance they continue to exhibit.
Congress's modis operandi since forever. create a crisis, blur how it began by blaming the opposition, institute legislation to fix the congressionally created crisis, make sure Congress gets rich from the cure.... Voila! crisis averted... sort of. Reagan ran head first into it when he signed legislation to end mental health incarceration because it was on the premise that the states would build psychiatric care facilities tondeal with mental health issues.... they didn't & now Reagan is blamed for the mental health crisis that Congress created with their lies.
true, sadly, Reagan thought he was doing good & the state would follow through. Instead, the prison population increased astronomically because there were no services for the mentally ill. They'd get arrested, released, get back into drugs, then arrested again! Then, Jerry Brown signed legislation that ended that cycle and emptied the prisons - out on the street because of empty do-gooder legislation that sounded good on paper, but failed in execution. And current leftist govt makes it worse every day thinking they are doing them a favor. I'll bet there are many many more living on the street with drug & mental issues in California than actually working & politicians won't do anything about it because feelings might be hurt.
and the reason leftists don't do anything about mental/drug problems? because leftist claptrap psychiatric mumbo jumbo doesn't work. Only the time-honored method of making people responsible for their actions and faith-based options work, but leftists can't let that happen!
Under penalty of severe punishment or imprisonment, The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires, among other things, that CEOs and CFOs of public companies certify the accuracy and fairness of reported financial statements, and that they have taken actions such that all material information is made known to them and that they have disclosed any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees.
In the event that senior executives of a public company were found to have misrepresented, manipulated, hid or falsified data regarding the safety and efficacy of their products, thereby knowingly putting at risk the health and lives of perhaps billions of people in exchange for billions of dollars in profits, would that constitute a violation under Sarbanes-Oxley and, if so, what might be the appropriate punishment?
What does it take for SEC to get involved? Maybe draw them a picture? Or is Sarbanes Oxley a complete sham?
All gov agencies are going to look the other way. ALL OF THEM.
It's going to be like Hillary Clinton and her server. "She didn't have any bad intentions."
Pfizer, Moderna, J and J etc did not have "bad intentions" so they'll be cleared. Perhaps after long show hearings. But they will be killed and they will have gotten away with murder.
Hearing him say the unvaxxed are the “weak links “ makes me sick. I’m so strong for ignoring all of their crap and NOT taking anything I didn’t feel I needed that could potentially harm my body. Not weak.. very strong and very tired of all of the lies.
Exactly how I feel. Those who resisted and did not comply, those who dissented, and dug deep for the data, and chose truth over the lies, they are the strong links in the chain, the unbreakable ones, the ones who held the line, who did not cave, who simply said, NO....those are the ones that matter now. The yarn is unraveling because of us, the warriors; no weak ones here.
When doctors write up their patients' case history, it is common practice for them to say "Denied" to any thing the doctors say about the patients, whether or not it's true.
Not a good explanation, but I can't remember exactly how it goes from when I read the case histories. It's been a while.
May the many well assembled substack responses to the pathetic "fact checking" form a fist, as a swarm of fish makes a big fish, that will crush the gaslighter's efforts decisively.
Here’s the thing, though — the lions we’ve been waiting for are in the mirror. There we see the lions who have been willing to delve beyond the paid-off propaganda peddlers and presstitutes. In the mirror we find the lions who stood up to the most intense peer pressure in the history of the world. The lions who were the first to stand up and ask what can be done to remedy our maladies. You’re the lions, and from what I gather you’re pissed off. You want justice.
In the linked article, you said (I'm paraphrasing) that lockdowns should be used only if "we" knew for sure they would make the difference between overwhelmed hospitals and or not.
More or less, yes. It definitely should have been the START of the conversation -- followed quickly by proof that hospitals were never in danger of being overrun. This should have stopped lockdowns in their tracks. Of course this should have only been one aspect of the attack on lockdowns, one disappointing aspect of 2020 was how few argued that government has no right to declare entire industries 'non-essential' or shut down a business. (Especially without actually proving the open business is a danger in the first place.) And I still maintain that if covid were as dangerous as the media wanted you to believe, people would have done their own 'distancing' and mandates would have still been unnecessary.
Knowing what we know now (that the virus was likely here long before March 2020), it's clear that we were ALREADY living with the virus all winter and we didn't even notice until governors threw covid patients into nursing homes, effectively speeding up the curve by infecting all the at-risk at once. Therefore it was obvious that lockdowns weren't the difference between an overwhelmed system and a manageable one.
With all due respect, the "lockdown" of living, breathing, free people should have been received with outrage. You're sick? Stay home? You've crapped your pants that you might get sick? Figure it out -- and leave me out of it. Afraid you're going to die? Guess what? We're all going to.
If in fact the decrepit and corrupt "hospital system" in the U.S., put on life support thanks to "Obamacare," would have resulted in the existing facilities becoming overwhelmed, then we figure out what to do about that when/if it looks like it's going to happen. Order the shutdown of commerce and tell people to limit their movements because of what -- in the world's lone "superpower"? Because doctors and hospitals might get overworked?
The lockdown of free people and the destruction of commerce and basic human rights I shall remember forever, including those who ordered it, supported it, and enforced it.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. (Maybe the first time I've said that seriously!)
Although I wish that we lived in a world in which freedom-based arguments would win the day, that is not the world in which we live. We need all sides of the argument in order to win over the most people possible (all IMO). Remember how "muh free-dumb" was the trendy insult for a while? I couldn't believe it! People literally mocking freedom, after decades of "I AM FREE TO BE THE REAL ME AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME!!!"
For some people, data-driven arguments will win the day. Arguments like "if we've got to be locked down to save the hospitals, why the heck are we not using this time to expand hospital capacity?!??!?!"
The people you describe -- those who have displayed their inability to live up to the ideals of liberty as many in that same cohort simultaneously and publicly expressed their disdain for it -- have done us all a big favor. We can now safely jettison any silly ideas that the people of the "exceptional nation" will defend liberty. Gee, thanks, Dad, for "fighting for freedom" the way you did. "The people" really appreciate it.
I long ago lost any notion that in order for freedom to succeed the majority needs convincing of its value. Untrue. That horde merely goes where it's led; they'll go any which way because they anchor to nothing. Oh...maybe they do...to such things as their own immediate survival or the feeling of being in the "club" or the immediate gratification they get from indulging their sanctimony toward those who would value freedom over mere survival. Damn, that's annoying. Public chastisement for you, cretin!
To suggest that the ordering of the large-scale suspension of human freedom "just for a few minutes" while "we get things in order" during the "emergency" could 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 lead to a happy ending is to reveal, IMO, a dangerous naiveté.
During a speech in the British House of Commons in 1783, William Pitt (the Younger) said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” I made a point about this in my newsletter, "Obedience".
I credit -- to a point -- those who pursue attempts to convince/persuade "the horde". I learned the hard way 'tis better to leave the horde to itself. Better to seek, find, and support those who need no convincing about the value of liberty first.
"Liberty is the great engine of value in the world. It is what allows people to pursue their discoveries of value. Take away people's liberty and they cannot be productive. They cannot create their lives or make their contributions. Only with liberty can people make progress in the discovery and pursuit of valued ends. That makes liberty the necessary foundation for valuing peoples choices, which establishes the priority of liberty as a fundamental principle." - Alec Rawls
Have to wonder what would be so bad they wouldn't lie about it. I mean, forcefully injecting basically the whole world with experimental pharmaceuticals pushed through a fraudulent testing regime in pursuit of billions of dollars but they're still working overtime to obfuscate the truth as it slowly emerges.
Where do they draw the line? Is there one anymore?
They run one around here with a little kid saying he took it because he didn't want to get his little sister sick. Horrible ad. I was reassured somewhat when I saw in small print 'actor portrayal' but saddened by the fact that there are actually parents doing this to their children.
The way the game is played, these folks are meticulously careful not to even mention lines,or acknowlege them. The only lines they are willing to discuss are lines drawn by "the enemy" whoever that is in this particular argument. Remember Alinsky's Rule 4? "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
Well, I think the unfine folks at Pfizer ain't fools.
They made sure to get everyone's hands dirty, top to bottom, side to side, and the truth takes down everyone. We can hope, of course, but a hopeful manifesto ain't enough; it's got to be the banner on an extremely large vacuuming woodchipper with enough fuel to keep it running as long as required.
Perceptive comment. By dragging the entire medical industry into this, including your trusted family physician who urged you to get the shot, they spread the blame far and wide. We goofed and never could have known they'll say, are you going to impugn the entire medical industry?
Yes, yes we are. Aside from things where my life literally hangs in the balance and I don't have a choice (like advanced trauma), I will never trust them again. Not that I did this time.
I've been surprised all my life by people who don't do their own research, and I've known for many decades that "mainstream" medical advice is only as durable as the next "mainstream" to pour down from the heights.
And really, I ain't all that brilliantly wise but I keep finding, over and over, that something I was a little doubtful of at any particular time in my life ended up being proved not such a great idea later.
I've had vaccines I felt were worthwhile, and I've refused vaccines I didn't think were worthwhile and I was the same about that with my kid, and I continue to be bemused by some other big Substack names who are making their crusades now after having taken this vax the minute it was rolled out.
Maybe I'm just stuck in the primitive stage of evolution where my instincts ain't been switched off yet.
Hardly stuck in a primitive stage of evolution at all. Use "intuition" instead of "instinct", though they're pretty much interchangeable, and see how far advanced you really are.
Trying to trick me, you wicked boy? I can see "mathematical" in that link. Doesn't everyone here know by now how afraid I am of--of--[can't even say that word again...)
Ha, just kidding (but not about the math).
Anyway--I do think intuition and instinct are separate but related faculties.
So--anyone here ever had "true dreams?" Can I tell you stories about *them!*
Although I quite like being called a wicked boy, in all honesty I wasn't trying to be provocative, I was merely drawing to your attention the now well-established link between intuition and higher order brain activity. Of course, you are right, there is a distinction between intuition and instinct, though one which isn't observed as often as it should be, even by yourself. My rough and ready guide is to prefer intuition when referring to an apprehension of the mind, while reserving instinct for use when the subject veers more towards describing the propensity of little dogs to hump your leg in the absence of a more appropriate target.
I've heard of the term "true dreams", but I don't know its exact meaning, and I'd rather not google it just in case I get a big tech totalitatarian response listing all the times Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates dream about each other, as well as all the stuff they dream about doing to us.
However, taking the words "true dreams" at face value I can tell you a story about dreams coming true, though I should say at the outset there is no reason to believe in any supernatural force at play.
When I was young, still at school actually, I developed an interest in horse racing; you know, studying the form, doing the math, analysing the statistics etc. This was in the days of yore before computers, the internet, cell phones and streaming ate our lives, so you had more time to think and engage in a different sort of life, a subject that, as you know, the bad cat has posted about more than once.
Over time, as I applied myself to my new subject, I started to notice something very interesting happening. I noticed an emerging ability to single out horses that would go on to win at very good, even long odds, and sometimes I would even dream about them winning. That's right, I could see myself at the track; watch the horses gallop past; and hear the call of the race just like I was there. What is pertinent to note is that none of these dreams ever came out of the blue. They all featured horses that I had zeroed in on in the hours before going to sleep, so I simply made the connection between something that I had invested time on, and which later appeared in a dream.
It wasn't until years later that I read about the rich, neural connections that formed in the brain, which then seemingly allowed thought to recognise patterns and travel at great speed along those connections until they arrived, as if by magic, at an answer or solution, which we have always described as "by way of intuition".
The sad part of this story is that as I got older, assumed more responsibilty, and developed an ever wider range of interests, the time left to keep an eye on the ponies dwindled and, correspondingly, my ability to identify winners, which no longer appeared in dreams, also dwindled.
This proves the axiom that no one ever expects DH Lawrence in their morning's email.
But I at least do earnestly hope for everyone to be provocative to their best abilities so you've been quite promising.
Anyway--supernatural, no; everything operates according to natural laws and it's just we haven't discovered very many of them yet and barely understand the ones we have.
I tend to feel intuition is like having a radio turned to a particular frequency and being able to hear the signal. I tune in to mostly chatter as we all do but sometimes there's something more. I'm up to five or six of demonstrable precognition.
Great article as always! You're right, the threads are unraveling, but the entrenched liars are re-wrapping the turd as quickly as they can. We need to continue to hammer away at the lies before they're dropped down the memory hole.
Throughout this entire debacle, you've emerged as a voice of sanity, wisdom, and leadership. Will you help connect your gatopals to gatoreaders who are looking for like-minded people to take this battle into the real-life arena?
This time has been important. We have learned who we can trust — and maybe more importantly who we can’t trust. We have seen leaders step into places where only real leadership would dare tread. Most of all, we have grown via sharing. We have shared our data, we have shared our stories, and alongside that we have shared our hopes and fears for this insane time in which we live. We have forged bonds that make us stronger together.
Our time has been spent expanding and developing this amazing network. The ‘big’ names I’ve mentioned have gained hundreds of thousands of serious readers. Substack provides a little blurb about what my new subscribers are also reading, so I can see a basic idea of the connections being made. It seems like every time I watch a Russel Brand video, he’s gained another MILLION subscribers. Joe Rogan hosts the biggest podcast on the planet. Like-minded people are out there. And now it’s time for the next phase of growth in this network. (Finally we’re talking about meatspace!)
This time has been life-changing; I agree with your words. Even while we have lost much, we have surely gained. I am a different person, and feel stronger because of it. I feel gratitude for both the writers and us, the readers.
Hopefully the threads get pulled all at once, the collapsed shitty Christmas sweater these assholes have been wearing gets tossed on the yule log fire.
The CDC director, news pundits, commentators, the whole premise was baked into an assumption that "the virus stops at those vaccinated" they're gaslighting super hard now.
hell a year into it they were still blaming "cases and deaths" on the unvaccinated
My eldest sister went even further... She blamed the unvaccinated for the rise of vaccine escape variants like omicron.
"My point is that if vaccine uptake had been more rapid and widespread, then variants like omicron would not have occurred."
And this is a woman whose job title is "Independent Research Consultant". She is charged with checking medical studies to ensure all protocols are met and the study is regulation compliant.
Isn't it the reverse? Doesn't a leaky vaccine encourage the evolution of variants that can bypass limited immunity?
Of course it is. The ones who say otherwise are living in bizarro world.
And really ignorant
A special kind of ignorance, one that is supported by education and intellectualism. I call this institutionalized ignorance: the teaching of invalid, contradictory concepts that undermine the ability to see the obvious.
Yup
Upside down world
Only in a world of facts and logic. Only where math works and science requires inquiry. ;-)
Yes.
Oy vey! 🤦🏼♀️
Omicron is not a descendant of Wuhan or Delta. It's a sibling or a cousin.
Also, there were plenty of variants before the jabs were deployed.
I would love to discuss all these points with her, but she has stopped speaking on the subject, at least with me. I think she wishes there were do-overs in life
I'm pretty sure two of my brothers aren't speaking to me. They'll acknowledge birthday and holiday texts, but I haven't seen them in over two years...and we live within 30 minutes of each other. This plandemic has broken many friendships and family relationships. We can only hope time will heal us.
My daughter will respond to texts but won't talk on the phone or Zoom and when she came to stay with her father the last time I had to be away, made sure she arrived a few hours after I had left and returned home several hours before I got back.
At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if this has morphed from distancing from her unclean, wrong-thinking, anti-vaxx mother to avoiding facing up to the mounting evidence she's been wrong. My grandson tells me she's way too deep in the matrix to see the bits of reality that are breaking through on even the most highly guarded mainstream media, but I'm hoping she's waking up.
I was talking with a friend today whose relationship with her daughters is similarly strained, and we agreed that what these criminals have done to our most precious relationships is as abominable a crime as the deaths and injuries they've inflicted.
I certainly feel like a pariah amongst my siblings.
My response to her and my family was simple. If the vaccine provided sterilising immunity like real vaccines, then you would be right but the manufacturer never made that claim and reality and time proved that true
We all wish there were do overs.
I know I do
Omicron was a later release
I've read that. Others like the Ethical Skeptic believe Omicron was already in circulation, possibly for several years, and rose to dominance aided by the jabs. Both seem plausible to me.
I hadn’t heard that before. It’s very plausible.
There is none so blind as she who refuses to see.
My husband claims the same thing…it’s got to be in the propaganda somewhere that I haven’t seen …and logic be damned…the same man understands that you must take all of your penicillin to prevent superbugs but cannot translate similar logic to the shots, which to me is the easiest, lay-person way to relate it (and neither of us have a strong scientific background, so easy to understand stuff is what we need)
I tried to use an analogy to illustrate the absurdity of shutdowns, lockdowns and isolation dictates in a discussion on 2020: "it's like preventing sudden infant death by drowning babies at birth" which as you might imagine didn't go over well.
I had to explain I wasn't advocating drowning babies at birth (really) and the point is that unless we evaluate the consequences of our actions fully, the outcome really isn't good. I stopped using analogies...and having risk/reward conversations with most people.
BTW did have one person respond "if you prevent the birth through birth control or early abortion, you don't have to worry about SIDS" and not being sarcastic. Another level of scary that this kind of thing is OK to say in public but questioning risk/reward of a drug isn't.
It's really dispiriting when people come out with those non-sequiters that show how completely differently they're recieving what you're saying, how divorced your realities are.
It's very difficult not to just quit the conversation when you realise they're still 7 storeys further back down the chain of reasoning, and the elevator is probably not working too well.
With this description, your sister is not a scientist. At best, she is a "compliance monitor", a species of bimbocrat equivalent to a legal assistant.
We all do our little pieces, but do not have to appreciate or acknowledge the big picture.
I think your description is fitting. She has a high IQ, but is an authoritarian to the bone. So compliance to authority seems to be her schtick.
back when "the science" of climate change started it's assent away from fact-based, logically consistent observation based science, I knew a lot of professional scientists and engineers who 'signed on' despite the obvious inconsistencies and stopped asking the wrong questions because they realized it was necessary to continue to work: to get funding, and get published, etc. You'd have a couple beers (or shots of tequila) and they'd readily admit it was BS but what are you gonna do when you've seen what happens to those who question it.
That's a decade or more ago (maybe 2 by now?) and what is alarming is that this "the science is settled" is now believed by so many who will then accept repression of "the deniers" when even that label should be a red flag to anyone studied in science. A consequence of this new culture of suppression of inquiry, I fear, is a new kind of "dark ages" limiting progress in the sciences because we can not overcome the burdens and boundaries of established convention (which has always been needed to advance beyond those boundaries).
Yes logical extension of denying logic.
"The vaccine protects us from the disease". When we get the disease "but I didn't die because the vaccine made it less severe". And then "the vaccine protects me from the original virus, not the variants, which is why I took two booster doses of the same vaccine". Finally "I got sick because of those mean, ignorant uneducated vax deniers" who's physiology somehow defeat the vaccine I took....
It just seems to get deeper and deeper, and yes, people who really should know better suspend all basic sensibility to follow the dictates of The Party in which they believe.
I don't know much about the Jehovah's Witness religion, but I am quite familiar with the religion of The Party and secularism, which seem to be link such that each requires the other.
The inherent conflict of secularism is that it exhibits all the negative traits of a religion that the average secularist or athirst claim are why they have rejected traditional religions. It requires fanatical dedication to the cause, unwavering faith in the "church" (party) leadership, and unquestioning loyalty. This leads to amazing things, like self-proclaimed liberals who are completely intolerant of anyone expressing a different view, who must demonize all that do not conform, and can't even consider an alternate explanation or allow even asking questions perceived to challenge their desired narrative "deniers", demonstrating closed minds to any alternate possibilities. And even more amazing things like these same people explaining why free speech is bad and self-identified Jews endorsing disarmament, and suppression of political opponents using extreme measures like declaring them insurrectionists and imprisoning them without due process of law.
See logic 101 above: if you believe in the vaccine, the logically the unvaccinated affect only other unvaccinated. To conclude that unvaccinated harm vaccinated people we must logically conclude the vaccine is ineffective. The only way to resolve this logical inconsistency is redefine what is expected from a vaccine...but even that is illogical.
So we cling to irrational explanations: "I got the plague but didn't die because I had the vaccine" . Just a start...
This was step 1. Needed to establish the value as so overwhelming that any risk was acceptable. Prerequisite to this was "unprecedented" fear (based mostly on un-factual assumptions and assertions). This virus will KILL YOU and all you love. step 2 is capitalize on the fear. There are so many ways to capitalize on irrational fear.
Yep. Want to have some fun? If you can contrive to have a captive audience of these people, show them videos of these experts saying this. It is really something to see the expressions on their faces.
PFIZER HAD TO HAVE KNOWN.. they had to have known it would not stop infection.
the shot makes the recepient generate a serum ( blood) IgG anti body response only. but the antibody that is responsible for preventing infection and spread is the IgA isotype found in the nasal mucosa. SO this shot would never have stopped infection. If it reduced the severity of the illness in those who were at risk and the safety profile was favorable then maybe it would have made sense to give it to at risk people. but there was never any change of herd immunity with this shot.
AND PFIZER HAD TO HAVE KNOWN THIS. because the vax industry has tried for decades to some up with a sterilizing shot for viral upper respiratory infections like covid and influenza in people and even pigs and chickens and they failed repeatedly.
So Pfizer knew and they obfuscated and lied and pretended like they didnt have time to study it and acted like it wasnt an important aspect of the vax when really it was the KEY to whole pandemic.
Pfizer did this because they knew that everyone would need boosters indefinitely and that meant big bucks. Like putting people on a subscription plan without them knowing. Or like what purdue pharma did with oxycontin.
the greatest fraud and crime in human history
“the greatest fraud and crime in human history”
So far.
Excellent comment. Science has been trying to come up with a vaccine for numerous coronaviruses for many years, always abject failures.
It had to have known because literally every piece of real-world data that we had showed that the vaccine didn't stop transmission.
thats right . And mechanistically the vax doenst induce IgA, no agent has ever worked to stop spread of viral upper respiratory infections. When people ask " why havent they produced A cure for the common cold?" Well... there's a reason, Pfizer knew it wouldnt stop infection and did either actively promoted the lie that it would or failed to publically correct the errors or misunderstanding of politicians and public health people. Fauci must have known as well. if he didnt that makes him ignorant and incompetent. If he did know and lied then that makes him evil. So fauci is either ignorant, incompetent or evil or some combo of all three
I'm glad someone else recognizes the need for IgA to fight a respiratory virus. The shots mainly stimulated IgG - which indicates they were stimulating a memory response - but IgG mainly fights infection in the blood, not lungs. They also didn't significantly stimulate T-cell function that would be an earlier line of defense against a viral infection than antibodies would.
Fauci is both ignorant and incompetent - there is no question there. As for evil? Perhaps some barkless beagles could weigh in on that.
Exactly - you can't vaccinate against a respiratory virus and prevent infection w/o inducing an immune response at the site of infection (as you said likely primarily including T-cells!). This was/is a 100% known fact - something I think many of us non-virologists/vaccinologists came to understand over 1 1/2 years ago.
Anyway, not sure they will be sterilizing, but there are a few interesting intranasal/oral IgA (and T cell) inducing vaccines fairly far along in development.
Bharat BioTech (India) developed inCovacc which was licensed from Washington University (St Louis). It's an adenovirus, spike-based vaccine recently approved - as a primary series - in India, with another phase 3 completed as a booster. Not much of the phase 3 human trial data is publicly released yet, though in previous trials it was seemingly successful in preventing transmission in rhesus macaques. Bharat's US partner (Ocugen) for Covaxin (whole virion vaccine) has also licensed the vaccine from Wash U to commercialize it in the US (& EU/Japan).
Vaxart also has oral vaccines which are similarly adenovirus based (a spike-only and a spike/n-protein version) and Codagenix (and Serum Institute of India) is developing a live attenuated intranasal vaccine.
May all be too little too late, but it is interesting how these options were not pulled forward during 'Warp Speed' when they were clearly in development at the time - especially so when all we seemed to hear from big pharma was that they took no warp speed $ (so what did it go towards???).
It is definitely plausible that Pfizer didn't have the data until after the "field trial" on the general public. Given that the EUAs bypassed the normal process of clinical studies.
The subsequent suppression of data, that's another story. It could be a best seller - lies, intrigue, corruption, murder, ... all it lacks is a hero :-(
They released the trial data that 'proved' the 95% efficacy, and THAT DATA ITSELF proved the jab doesn't stop transmission, considering they only measured people who got sick. That's not how vaccines work (or wasn't back then!)
How does one demonstrate efficacy in such a trail? Give 100 people the vaccine, then expose all 100 to the virus, and see who get's sick? Then do the same with 100 people who did not receive the vaccine, to establish a control with which to compare the effect. While 100 people wouldn't be mathematically valid to generalize to a population of 7 billion, and there are ethical issues with intentionally infecting people.
I've read some clinical trials of other drugs that follow the control model, with volunteers - people who are already sick and usually untreatable. That sort of control can show a difference between no meds and meds in treating a condition, but how does one validate prevention of a condition? From the literature it seems typically a lot of ad-hoc methods masquerading as science are used. I didn't see data on the pre-release clinical trial because what I found on the FDA site made it look like there was none prior to the EUA.
Kinda like genocide
Yes, yes and yes. Putting infected elderly in nursing homes in order to spread the virus and increase the body count was a move that they hoped would not raise much suspicion. And if old folks die, who cares, right? They lived their lives. IMO, ventilators and Remdesivir (along with the lack of early treatment prohibited by the FDA) killed far more people than the virus itself ever did. One of the worst pieces of fallout from this entire charade is that we’ll never know for sure what the actual death rate is for SARS CoV-2, and how many deaths would have, could have and should have been prevented, which is something that the elite (including Fauci) never wanted us to know.
Not to mention the financial incentives for hospitals to identify, "Treat", and kill as many people as possible. Gotta give these guys credit for effort.
It doesn’t stop there. They also incentivized morticians who were paid a bonus (of sorts) to embalm corpses of those who died of (or with) COVID. And to discourage families from reporting all of this, they were dangled a $9000 carrot to help pay the final expenses of their dead. Kind of like hush money. You have no idea the number of funeral directors and family members called to request that I “correct” death certificates that I had signed, to include COVIDas the cause (or at least a contributing factor) in the death of their meal ticket...er, I mean “loved one”.
Ugh... I didn't want to hear that, but who would be surprised, at this point? Thank you for sharing.
Whoa! I never heard about that $9000 funeral expense payoff. But even more interesting is your experience with funeral directors requesting that you change the cause of death on death certificates. I hadn't heard about that either. Thanks for reporting that.
I hope a substacker does a report on this topic. It’s news to me!
Democide is probably the word..
Yep. Democide.
But hey, the government is saving money on society security and medicare payments to the elderly that have died, so it's a big win!
/sarc
Also the goal due to huge BB cohort.
If by that you mean to blame one of the two named political parties, look closer.
Plenty of politicians identifying as republicans played along with this. There really is only one dominant party (The Party) with few outliers (e.g. Rand Paul) but most just part of the theatre. 46 state and 2 US territories implemented essentially identical "shutdown and lock-in" orders, clearly crafted by the national party. 22 of those governors were republicans.
AFAIK the effects of the vaccine know no political affiliations.
Oh hell yes, both parties have crap for brains so called reps who are after money..and then prestige...and then power. Look at the Turtle (McConnell).
I want him triple jabbed and boosted twice and not with saline.
Do we all realize that everyone today who is in politics is in it for the $$$$...they all go in with nothing and come out multimillionaires. I am fed to the back teeth with the corruption and self dealing.
Yes. It was and 8s deliberaye democide
And it is just the beginning, I fear. I do not feel that it is a coincidence that the "assisted suicide/right to die" movement started about the same time that the first rumbles were heard about social security/medicare going broke. Expect to see more of this sort of thing.
Good comment!
FWIW, I have a friend who managed some of the CV clinical trials for Pfi$er. We no longer can talk about her job, but this is what she said last summer, before Paxlovid:
"The only way to stop CV was with a vaccine. If we didn't put one out, millions of people would have died, since vaccination is the ONLY treatment."
And millions of young bright professionals joined the nazi party back in the day
Clergymen , lawyers , doctors and other intelelctuals and professionals Were some of the most ardent supporters of which burning in the middle ages
What an utterly moronic statement by your friend.
WOW!
Pfizer certainly knew they hadn't tested for transmission, but we all did. The Stage 3 trials were conducted for two months during a time when viral transmission was low. Since the jabs induce IgG antibodies (blood) and not IgA antibodies (mucosal), the jabbed were always going to "catch" covid. The question was if they would become ill. Since they skipped the animal trials (in which challenge is permitted), they may not have known if the jabbed would become very ill with high viral loads that would enhance transmission. It's amazing what they didn't find when they didn't look for it. My guess is that Pfizer will try to pass blame on the FDA (well, they let us do it...so it's not our fault). They're all to blame.
Change Pfizer in your statements to darpa/batfa/dod...and you will have it nailed correctly. Pfizer etc were only working under thrir direction...this entire thing was a trial of the us' s ability to develop a vaccine for a bioweapin and they didnt give a shot if it worked or not. It was just a proof of concept e excercise...
Interesting take on the situation.
I've always thought that it was an imperfect two part bioweapon: the virus was released to make people take the bioweapon. IMHO, it hasn't worked the way they wanted it to work.
Can't add link but go watch interview with Corona Investigative Committee on globalresearch.ca 5th Oct date, I think it is.
Nah, it's worse than "they had to have known". There's no way they could possibly have known, because they never even tested for it before shoving it down the public's throat, making claims they knew they couldn't prove.
I disagree
Pfizer knew that the vaccine would not generate IGA and generate heard immunity. They knew that it would fail to provide sterilizing immunity Pfizer knew that it would fail to prevent infection and spread. And they lied about this and misrepresented this on purpose so that they could sell booster after booster
I thought I had heard at the start, that in the telescoped trials, they had already moved on with the next steps when it became apparent that the monkeys they were testing on, got sick. From that they could know that it wasn't going to work. But apparently they didn't care or rather, like someone said, that failure was what they needed for their "subscription plan". Really, just like the earlier computer Antivirus subscriptions. What an uncanny similarity here, too.
Or there was just so much political and peer pressure to push through with the development of this thing. Imagine being in a board room or committee meeting during the phases of development of the vaccine. And it became evident that it wouldn’t stop infection or spread but they were halfway through rolling this thing out and their prestige and a huge amount of money was on the line. No one had the guts to speak up
Sadly, this reminds me of the religion of my family (which I left in 1984). Once people rise in their church offices to paid “general authorities” in the church’s corporate offices, at least some of them figure out it is all made up, not true. But they are so invested in it, besides having left high paying careers as lawyers, doctors, businessmen, that they have to sit there in silence, and worse, give “faith promoting” speeches to believing members who suspect nothing. That corruption is everywhere and it is very sad to know it. Sad to see so many people duped. Can’t say anything because most don’t want to know (as my scientist father told me re the church). Trying to tell people who don’t want to know is like teaching a pig to sing: it is impossible and it just frustrates you and the pig.
Yes covid is a cult
Kinda like Epstein...
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/25/cindy-mccain-on-jeffrey-epstein-we-all-knew-what-he-was-doing/
Also, they needed these vaccines approved no matter what, in order to them be able use the mRNA platform for everything else. So, in view of that more important agenda it was irrelevant whether the vaccines worked or not. (This being the pharma agenda, while the involved oligarchs and state actors were/are in addition to that, pursuing specific other agendas.)
BIL Gates 2.0
And how would they know that if they never tested for it? They may have suspected it, they may have believed that, but without testing for it they most certainly did not *know* that it wouldn't.
You are missing the point
This type of mRNA therapy is injected into a persons arm and stimulates the body to produce IgG serum (blood antibodies) and then , later on it was hoped memory T cells
This type of mRNA therapy would not cause the body to create a mucosal IgA response. The IGA antibodies are exclusively secreted in the respiratory mucosa and in the intestines
This are basic infectious disease and immunology facts that have been known for decades
There have been many times in the past when various groups have tried to produce these types of treatments and vaccines for animals that are raised for food like chickens and pigs, and they have all failed to produce neutralizing or sterilizing immunity that would prevent infection and spread. They have all failed to produce herd immunity
So based on decades of worldwide experience with these types of therapies Pfizer and Moderno and many other people had to have known that this particular Covid shot would not produce sterilizing heard immunity because it does not produce the IGA mucosal response
So they didn’t need to test for it. Because they knew that it wouldn’t produce herd immunity. They knew that it probably wouldn’t prevent infection spread and transmission. And that is specifically why they didn’t test for it because they knew that if they did test for it would show that it did NOT prevent infection
So they LIED about it and marketed it anyway and pushed it KNOWING it would probably not stop infection and spread
They lied because their was so much political pressure AND they knew they could sell it any endless booster
You understand:
They didn’t test because they knew it would probably fail the test. And if it failed the test no one would take it. So they wouldn’t be able to sell it. So they didn’t test, and they lied about it knowing it would probably fail the test, and now they can sell endless boosters
You see it’s a giant mindfuck, global worldwide historic fraud and crime against humanity
Very clearly put. They did know, because they've been attempting to make this technology work for years. This was pure opportunism.
The global situation was contributed to by many powerful players, with possibly slightly different motivations. The pharmaceutical arm is the easiest to understand.
Yes exactly
I'm still amazed at the booster craze. Another level of logical denial. (1) the vaccine works but the virus mutates and (2) more of the same vaccine is the solution. (1) is shown true with flu viruses, but if that's the explanation for why the vaccine isn't protecting you, then more of the same makes no sense. And yet...it seems fairly obvious that having achieved 90% uptake rates in the most populous states, boosters create a "start over fresh" market opportunity (sell more of the same stuff). Second order logical inconsistency: big corporations are evil, greed driven organisms, and none more evil than drug companies, so believe everything the drug companies say and get the next shot.
I know idiots who are still telling me the reason there is no herd immunity is because I am unvaccinated while in the same breath denying that the vax was supposed to stop the spread. If they can't see the insanity in that there is no hope for them.
CDC changed the definition of herd immunity when people started refusing the jab... it was always when the majority had had the disease & had natural immunity, you had reached herd immunity. The CDC changed it to say that herd immunity is achieved only when the majority are vaxxed.
How long before the CDC changes the definition of transmission?
it's probably in the works now!
Yes, I remember this and it was a HUGE red flag when Fauci went from saying we need 70% vax uptake for herd immunity and then a week later says, actually we need 90%+ vax uptake for herd immunity. During that same time the CDC and the media were repeating the same line that natural immunity now suddenly means nothing, that it no longer exists and I was like, WTH is going on?
There’s honestly no hope for that kind of willful stupidity
We were literally forced (hahahahha they tried) to get vaccinated on the premise that it would stop the spread. We supposedly had to get vaccinated to save grandmom.
Nope.
We’re NOT allowing you cocksuckers to gaslight us in this one.
EPSTEIN CLIENT LIST
STOP THE SPREAD WAS A LIE
I remember some very pointed questions in the beginning, demanding to know if it stopped transmission. It seemed like an odd thing to fixate on at the time, because of course that’s what vaccines do, right? Now we get it. Now we know. And we know more than they intended for us to learn about a bunch of other vaccines, too.
Well, a good chunk of what they’d have us believe about vaccines in general was always flimsy and based on the success of one or two vaccines. But they wanted to apply it to all vaccines. So saying “all” vaccines are safe and effective is like saying all painkillers work the same, from aspirin to opioids.
And of course, there's the minor matter that these are not actually vaccines.
Honestly, having to defend this at this point is ludicrous. Everything about this “vaccine” was about preventing spread. So were the mandates and shaming. If pharma and the masses are denying this now we have bigger problems than we ever knew.
I think it started there , but quickly enough it turned into a control campaign.
The legacy of the vaccine fanatics is that you can show them evidence of their wrongdoings and falsehoods they promoted and they will shrug it off or even worse, double down on the lies. It’s truly breathtaking the arrogance they continue to exhibit.
Congress's modis operandi since forever. create a crisis, blur how it began by blaming the opposition, institute legislation to fix the congressionally created crisis, make sure Congress gets rich from the cure.... Voila! crisis averted... sort of. Reagan ran head first into it when he signed legislation to end mental health incarceration because it was on the premise that the states would build psychiatric care facilities tondeal with mental health issues.... they didn't & now Reagan is blamed for the mental health crisis that Congress created with their lies.
true, sadly, Reagan thought he was doing good & the state would follow through. Instead, the prison population increased astronomically because there were no services for the mentally ill. They'd get arrested, released, get back into drugs, then arrested again! Then, Jerry Brown signed legislation that ended that cycle and emptied the prisons - out on the street because of empty do-gooder legislation that sounded good on paper, but failed in execution. And current leftist govt makes it worse every day thinking they are doing them a favor. I'll bet there are many many more living on the street with drug & mental issues in California than actually working & politicians won't do anything about it because feelings might be hurt.
and the reason leftists don't do anything about mental/drug problems? because leftist claptrap psychiatric mumbo jumbo doesn't work. Only the time-honored method of making people responsible for their actions and faith-based options work, but leftists can't let that happen!
Thanks, Gary, for a part of history, most likely not well known about.
Almost like they're in a cult or something...huh
I say again: Two words: Sarbanes Oxley
Under penalty of severe punishment or imprisonment, The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires, among other things, that CEOs and CFOs of public companies certify the accuracy and fairness of reported financial statements, and that they have taken actions such that all material information is made known to them and that they have disclosed any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees.
In the event that senior executives of a public company were found to have misrepresented, manipulated, hid or falsified data regarding the safety and efficacy of their products, thereby knowingly putting at risk the health and lives of perhaps billions of people in exchange for billions of dollars in profits, would that constitute a violation under Sarbanes-Oxley and, if so, what might be the appropriate punishment?
What does it take for SEC to get involved? Maybe draw them a picture? Or is Sarbanes Oxley a complete sham?
LOL. SEC involved? Nope.
All gov agencies are going to look the other way. ALL OF THEM.
It's going to be like Hillary Clinton and her server. "She didn't have any bad intentions."
Pfizer, Moderna, J and J etc did not have "bad intentions" so they'll be cleared. Perhaps after long show hearings. But they will be killed and they will have gotten away with murder.
BTW, I loved those books by Trevanian. Do you drive a Volvo?
I loved the books too, hence the nic.
No, not upscale enough to drive a Volvo. A Toyota gal.
I loved that he would kick the car every time he got close to it....
What an astute statement...
Hearing him say the unvaxxed are the “weak links “ makes me sick. I’m so strong for ignoring all of their crap and NOT taking anything I didn’t feel I needed that could potentially harm my body. Not weak.. very strong and very tired of all of the lies.
Exactly how I feel. Those who resisted and did not comply, those who dissented, and dug deep for the data, and chose truth over the lies, they are the strong links in the chain, the unbreakable ones, the ones who held the line, who did not cave, who simply said, NO....those are the ones that matter now. The yarn is unraveling because of us, the warriors; no weak ones here.
Well said
I'm with you...100%
When doctors write up their patients' case history, it is common practice for them to say "Denied" to any thing the doctors say about the patients, whether or not it's true.
Not a good explanation, but I can't remember exactly how it goes from when I read the case histories. It's been a while.
May the many well assembled substack responses to the pathetic "fact checking" form a fist, as a swarm of fish makes a big fish, that will crush the gaslighter's efforts decisively.
It's time to let the lions loose.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/this-is-not-a-drill-part-2
Here’s the thing, though — the lions we’ve been waiting for are in the mirror. There we see the lions who have been willing to delve beyond the paid-off propaganda peddlers and presstitutes. In the mirror we find the lions who stood up to the most intense peer pressure in the history of the world. The lions who were the first to stand up and ask what can be done to remedy our maladies. You’re the lions, and from what I gather you’re pissed off. You want justice.
In the linked article, you said (I'm paraphrasing) that lockdowns should be used only if "we" knew for sure they would make the difference between overwhelmed hospitals and or not.
Did you actually mean that?
More or less, yes. It definitely should have been the START of the conversation -- followed quickly by proof that hospitals were never in danger of being overrun. This should have stopped lockdowns in their tracks. Of course this should have only been one aspect of the attack on lockdowns, one disappointing aspect of 2020 was how few argued that government has no right to declare entire industries 'non-essential' or shut down a business. (Especially without actually proving the open business is a danger in the first place.) And I still maintain that if covid were as dangerous as the media wanted you to believe, people would have done their own 'distancing' and mandates would have still been unnecessary.
Knowing what we know now (that the virus was likely here long before March 2020), it's clear that we were ALREADY living with the virus all winter and we didn't even notice until governors threw covid patients into nursing homes, effectively speeding up the curve by infecting all the at-risk at once. Therefore it was obvious that lockdowns weren't the difference between an overwhelmed system and a manageable one.
With all due respect, the "lockdown" of living, breathing, free people should have been received with outrage. You're sick? Stay home? You've crapped your pants that you might get sick? Figure it out -- and leave me out of it. Afraid you're going to die? Guess what? We're all going to.
If in fact the decrepit and corrupt "hospital system" in the U.S., put on life support thanks to "Obamacare," would have resulted in the existing facilities becoming overwhelmed, then we figure out what to do about that when/if it looks like it's going to happen. Order the shutdown of commerce and tell people to limit their movements because of what -- in the world's lone "superpower"? Because doctors and hospitals might get overworked?
The lockdown of free people and the destruction of commerce and basic human rights I shall remember forever, including those who ordered it, supported it, and enforced it.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. (Maybe the first time I've said that seriously!)
Although I wish that we lived in a world in which freedom-based arguments would win the day, that is not the world in which we live. We need all sides of the argument in order to win over the most people possible (all IMO). Remember how "muh free-dumb" was the trendy insult for a while? I couldn't believe it! People literally mocking freedom, after decades of "I AM FREE TO BE THE REAL ME AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME!!!"
For some people, data-driven arguments will win the day. Arguments like "if we've got to be locked down to save the hospitals, why the heck are we not using this time to expand hospital capacity?!??!?!"
The people you describe -- those who have displayed their inability to live up to the ideals of liberty as many in that same cohort simultaneously and publicly expressed their disdain for it -- have done us all a big favor. We can now safely jettison any silly ideas that the people of the "exceptional nation" will defend liberty. Gee, thanks, Dad, for "fighting for freedom" the way you did. "The people" really appreciate it.
I long ago lost any notion that in order for freedom to succeed the majority needs convincing of its value. Untrue. That horde merely goes where it's led; they'll go any which way because they anchor to nothing. Oh...maybe they do...to such things as their own immediate survival or the feeling of being in the "club" or the immediate gratification they get from indulging their sanctimony toward those who would value freedom over mere survival. Damn, that's annoying. Public chastisement for you, cretin!
To suggest that the ordering of the large-scale suspension of human freedom "just for a few minutes" while "we get things in order" during the "emergency" could 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 lead to a happy ending is to reveal, IMO, a dangerous naiveté.
During a speech in the British House of Commons in 1783, William Pitt (the Younger) said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” I made a point about this in my newsletter, "Obedience".
I credit -- to a point -- those who pursue attempts to convince/persuade "the horde". I learned the hard way 'tis better to leave the horde to itself. Better to seek, find, and support those who need no convincing about the value of liberty first.
"Liberty is the great engine of value in the world. It is what allows people to pursue their discoveries of value. Take away people's liberty and they cannot be productive. They cannot create their lives or make their contributions. Only with liberty can people make progress in the discovery and pursuit of valued ends. That makes liberty the necessary foundation for valuing peoples choices, which establishes the priority of liberty as a fundamental principle." - Alec Rawls
Fact choking is a much more appropriate term!😉
Have to wonder what would be so bad they wouldn't lie about it. I mean, forcefully injecting basically the whole world with experimental pharmaceuticals pushed through a fraudulent testing regime in pursuit of billions of dollars but they're still working overtime to obfuscate the truth as it slowly emerges.
Where do they draw the line? Is there one anymore?
Still running get your Covid shot ads
They run one around here with a little kid saying he took it because he didn't want to get his little sister sick. Horrible ad. I was reassured somewhat when I saw in small print 'actor portrayal' but saddened by the fact that there are actually parents doing this to their children.
The way the game is played, these folks are meticulously careful not to even mention lines,or acknowlege them. The only lines they are willing to discuss are lines drawn by "the enemy" whoever that is in this particular argument. Remember Alinsky's Rule 4? "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
dont forget, it was never a vaccine under the proper definition
Well, I think the unfine folks at Pfizer ain't fools.
They made sure to get everyone's hands dirty, top to bottom, side to side, and the truth takes down everyone. We can hope, of course, but a hopeful manifesto ain't enough; it's got to be the banner on an extremely large vacuuming woodchipper with enough fuel to keep it running as long as required.
Perceptive comment. By dragging the entire medical industry into this, including your trusted family physician who urged you to get the shot, they spread the blame far and wide. We goofed and never could have known they'll say, are you going to impugn the entire medical industry?
Yes, yes we are. Aside from things where my life literally hangs in the balance and I don't have a choice (like advanced trauma), I will never trust them again. Not that I did this time.
I've been surprised all my life by people who don't do their own research, and I've known for many decades that "mainstream" medical advice is only as durable as the next "mainstream" to pour down from the heights.
And really, I ain't all that brilliantly wise but I keep finding, over and over, that something I was a little doubtful of at any particular time in my life ended up being proved not such a great idea later.
I've had vaccines I felt were worthwhile, and I've refused vaccines I didn't think were worthwhile and I was the same about that with my kid, and I continue to be bemused by some other big Substack names who are making their crusades now after having taken this vax the minute it was rolled out.
Maybe I'm just stuck in the primitive stage of evolution where my instincts ain't been switched off yet.
I've clicked the like button on your comment a hundred times and it won't register so let me tell you the old fashion way, I like your comment.
Thank you.
"Likes" are sometimes glitchy. I found that if you click on the heart and then go away and come back again, you'll find it's worked.
Same
Hardly stuck in a primitive stage of evolution at all. Use "intuition" instead of "instinct", though they're pretty much interchangeable, and see how far advanced you really are.
https://theconversation.com/mathematical-discoveries-take-intuition-and-creativity-and-now-a-little-help-from-ai-172900
Trying to trick me, you wicked boy? I can see "mathematical" in that link. Doesn't everyone here know by now how afraid I am of--of--[can't even say that word again...)
Ha, just kidding (but not about the math).
Anyway--I do think intuition and instinct are separate but related faculties.
So--anyone here ever had "true dreams?" Can I tell you stories about *them!*
Although I quite like being called a wicked boy, in all honesty I wasn't trying to be provocative, I was merely drawing to your attention the now well-established link between intuition and higher order brain activity. Of course, you are right, there is a distinction between intuition and instinct, though one which isn't observed as often as it should be, even by yourself. My rough and ready guide is to prefer intuition when referring to an apprehension of the mind, while reserving instinct for use when the subject veers more towards describing the propensity of little dogs to hump your leg in the absence of a more appropriate target.
I've heard of the term "true dreams", but I don't know its exact meaning, and I'd rather not google it just in case I get a big tech totalitatarian response listing all the times Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates dream about each other, as well as all the stuff they dream about doing to us.
However, taking the words "true dreams" at face value I can tell you a story about dreams coming true, though I should say at the outset there is no reason to believe in any supernatural force at play.
When I was young, still at school actually, I developed an interest in horse racing; you know, studying the form, doing the math, analysing the statistics etc. This was in the days of yore before computers, the internet, cell phones and streaming ate our lives, so you had more time to think and engage in a different sort of life, a subject that, as you know, the bad cat has posted about more than once.
Over time, as I applied myself to my new subject, I started to notice something very interesting happening. I noticed an emerging ability to single out horses that would go on to win at very good, even long odds, and sometimes I would even dream about them winning. That's right, I could see myself at the track; watch the horses gallop past; and hear the call of the race just like I was there. What is pertinent to note is that none of these dreams ever came out of the blue. They all featured horses that I had zeroed in on in the hours before going to sleep, so I simply made the connection between something that I had invested time on, and which later appeared in a dream.
It wasn't until years later that I read about the rich, neural connections that formed in the brain, which then seemingly allowed thought to recognise patterns and travel at great speed along those connections until they arrived, as if by magic, at an answer or solution, which we have always described as "by way of intuition".
The sad part of this story is that as I got older, assumed more responsibilty, and developed an ever wider range of interests, the time left to keep an eye on the ponies dwindled and, correspondingly, my ability to identify winners, which no longer appeared in dreams, also dwindled.
This proves the axiom that no one ever expects DH Lawrence in their morning's email.
But I at least do earnestly hope for everyone to be provocative to their best abilities so you've been quite promising.
Anyway--supernatural, no; everything operates according to natural laws and it's just we haven't discovered very many of them yet and barely understand the ones we have.
I tend to feel intuition is like having a radio turned to a particular frequency and being able to hear the signal. I tune in to mostly chatter as we all do but sometimes there's something more. I'm up to five or six of demonstrable precognition.
"Yes, yes we are." Yup. We are indeed.
Great article as always! You're right, the threads are unraveling, but the entrenched liars are re-wrapping the turd as quickly as they can. We need to continue to hammer away at the lies before they're dropped down the memory hole.
Throughout this entire debacle, you've emerged as a voice of sanity, wisdom, and leadership. Will you help connect your gatopals to gatoreaders who are looking for like-minded people to take this battle into the real-life arena?
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/this-is-not-a-drill-part-2
This time has been important. We have learned who we can trust — and maybe more importantly who we can’t trust. We have seen leaders step into places where only real leadership would dare tread. Most of all, we have grown via sharing. We have shared our data, we have shared our stories, and alongside that we have shared our hopes and fears for this insane time in which we live. We have forged bonds that make us stronger together.
Our time has been spent expanding and developing this amazing network. The ‘big’ names I’ve mentioned have gained hundreds of thousands of serious readers. Substack provides a little blurb about what my new subscribers are also reading, so I can see a basic idea of the connections being made. It seems like every time I watch a Russel Brand video, he’s gained another MILLION subscribers. Joe Rogan hosts the biggest podcast on the planet. Like-minded people are out there. And now it’s time for the next phase of growth in this network. (Finally we’re talking about meatspace!)
This time has been life-changing; I agree with your words. Even while we have lost much, we have surely gained. I am a different person, and feel stronger because of it. I feel gratitude for both the writers and us, the readers.
Hopefully the threads get pulled all at once, the collapsed shitty Christmas sweater these assholes have been wearing gets tossed on the yule log fire.
I'm getting my chestnuts ready as we speak.
Wonderful imagery.
They will gas light all the way to Nuremberg II. This is now about staying out of prison or worse, and preserving their assets.