Paul1405

You need to understand that you've been brainwashed.

The fact you're calling it a vaccine means you have been brainwashed, okay? It's not.

A vaccine is a protein, usually of a dead pathogen, that causes an immune response.

The jabs are an irreversible genetic modification, of live pathogen material, that is capable of spreading from those who accepted the jab (whout informed consent) to those who didn't, causing death and injury. Fact.

Your saying "authorities" "deemed" it "safe" only begs all the questions. It only makes sense if you assume totalitarian premises.

That was the entire defence that was tried and condemned at Nuremberg, get a clue, fascist.

The Nuremberg *medical* principles require informed consent from those participating in medical experimentation.

To the extent they have not given informed consent - and they clearly haven't - the Nuremberg principles apply. Your opinion in favour of human rights abuses changes nothing, and only proves itself.

You need to understand that your ideology that "on balance" some people need to be killed by policy without their informed consent, for a better society, is abusive. It is exactly the ideology that our ancestors fought the Nazis to defeat. You are the flat-earther anti-intellectual you are talking about.

You, and the government, have not considered a voluntary dispensation, and this invalidates your entire line of reasoning.

People all over the world are being pressured into accepting it, including by being sacked, or Australians prevented from leaving. You are lying.

People are not a herd of cattle belonging to the clever superior people in government. That's precisely what Nuremberg stands for.

*Think* of what you're saying. You have NO IDEA what conditions are going to be attached to the vacciner passport, now or in the future.

Yeadon is not "anti-vaxxer", don't be absurd.

You've got a brain. Use it!

As things stand, anyone participating in administering the covid vaccine belongs on the gallows, and the only reason you can give against this conclusion is the reasons that the Nazis gave at Nuremberg.

Not much of a recommendation, is it :-

Cumberland,

If you can only act the moron and carry on the raving nincompoop act, then discussion ended. At the close of play the vast majority will be vaccinated with no ill effect, and peace and harmony will return.

Paul1405

As proved by nothing?

As proved by you descending to schoolyard name-calling?

And most people will be safe except those whom it kills or injures, like the 15 year old who died of a heart attack after the jab, and the breast-feeding baby who died after its mother got the jab?

Yes? That"s what you're saying?

You're saying that committing acts defined by law as crimes against humanity is okay because a right is whatever the government says it is, the government is above the law, law and just following orders is a defence?

Yes? Correct?

You DON'T KNOW whether or not people will be safe - NOBODY KNOWS, you fool.

How could they know? They've never done it before. The process usualy takes 10 to 15 years. The clinical trials don't finish for at least a year.They discontinued the animal trials because it was killing too many animals.

You don't understand what you're talking about - and you don't even care LOL! You're like the perfect brainwashed sheep - just content to run with the herd and bleat your brainwashed slogans. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Hi Foxy,

There is a degree of danger with any medication, from the mild to the extreme, indeed for all of us danger is everywhere, a short walk to the shops has inherent dangers, road traffic, psychopaths leaking in the bushes, old folks in golf carts on the footpath etc. Given the benefits of shopping substantially outweigh the inherent dangers, we freely choose to "make that trip" two or three times a week, I'll be undertaking such a perilous journey this morning, wish me luck!

In a way having the jab is no different than making that trip to the shops, there are inherent dangers in both, but there is also benefits. Given the evidence one has to decide if the positives outweigh the negatives, and with the vaccine I believe that to be true.

Recently my son had a passenger die of a heart attack on the bus he was driving, some would argue without evidence that riding on buses causes heart attacks. Similarly without evidence some will relate post vaccination death, with the vaccine. The truth is 100% of those vaccinated will die, with such high numbers of vaccinations its like for some death will be very soon, maybe that day. Where possible anti vaxxers will try and link as many deaths as possible to the vaccine.

What might be of interest is Britain, a country that has been very successful with its rollout and uptake of their vaccination program. A comparison with pre-vaccination deaths and infections with now shows a marked decline in both. This could be coincidental but on the balance of probability its most likely down to the high levels of vaccination in the country.

Paul1405

You're talking about it *as if* it's a question of people voluntarily taking the vaccine without harming others, or not.

But you're ignoring the fact of enormous corrupt corporate interests which you yourself have claimed to care about; of corrupt governmental interests which your docility hasn't noticed, and the fact that it is not a vaccine, and is neither safe nor effective, that people have not given informed consent to be guinear pigs, and that it spreads to other non-consenting people. This completely invalidates your jumbled confused line of reasoning.

Over half the cases presenting in NYC have now had TWO jabs.

So it doesn't stop you getting the virus, doesn't stop you getting sick and doesn't stop you infecting others. And it's not a vaccine.

And there is no significant rise in mortality, which means it's not a pandemic, as follows.

Since the PCR tests have a 97% false positive test, and were never designed for diagnosis, and since they can't distinguish between a pawpaw, a pheasant, a coca-cola, and coronavirus, what makes you think they can distinbuish between flu and covid?

The entire 'pandemic' is a statistical artefect that consists of lumping all the flu cases, and the 93% deaths from co-morbidities (CDC), into the covid "cases" column and - voila! - pandemic for credulous morons to panic about. (Never in the history of medicine has a "case" been defined as one who is not sick.)

Here's a recent picture of Paul1405:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/NCOLEfTwLbxx/

It's now at the stage where business and schools are refusing to take VACCINATED persons..

Hi again Foxy,

I didn't post anything to support my claim that the UK vaccination program has impacted the infection and death rates in that country. From the ABC;

"According to researchers at University College London, that’s when so-called herd immunity could be achieved in the U.K. Almost three-quarters of the population will have antibodies against the virus, either through vaccination or past infection, they estimate."

"Britain has already seen a plunge in new cases and deaths, and the government will relax restrictions, including on outdoor dining, on Monday. Those developments have fueled hopes that the nation will soon shake off its Covid shackles."

I don't profess to be a "Covid Genius" like some anti vaxxes will claim they are, posting all sorts of dubious nonsense without any actual supporting evidence.