I agree. Excellent work, many thanks, but a few nits & a question:
"The jabs have *permanently* (or at least long term) weakened the immune system of *all* the recipients, young and old..." Asterisks added. For the following reasons I think that goes a bit too far:
1. Boosters. It may only appear to be perma-damage because harm is frequent…
I agree. Excellent work, many thanks, but a few nits & a question:
"The jabs have *permanently* (or at least long term) weakened the immune system of *all* the recipients, young and old..." Asterisks added. For the following reasons I think that goes a bit too far:
1. Boosters. It may only appear to be perma-damage because harm is frequently inflicted again or worsened by "boosters", overcoming or masking recovery (if any) from prior "vaccine" or "booster" damage.
2. Genes. Some may be disposed to survive the "vaccine" without significant or permanent harm. Others may be especially vulnerable.
I think it can be concluded that a significant % of recipients are perma-damaged or damaged again by "boosters"; perpetuated or worsened by "boosters" is more likely than perma-damage & no chance of recovery. That has the advantage of providing hope, and incentive to stop "boosting". Otherwise, "if I'm perma-F'd anyway, I might as well stay boosted to keep my doc & lefty pals happy."
"The PREP act protects against civil liability only. This behavior is criminal. These people are not protected...I plan on filing a complaint..."
Good, but does PREP shield against *all* civil liability? e.g. Normally fraud can be grounds for civil damages too. Does PREP shield civil liability for things like intentional fraud?
I agree. Excellent work, many thanks, but a few nits & a question:
"The jabs have *permanently* (or at least long term) weakened the immune system of *all* the recipients, young and old..." Asterisks added. For the following reasons I think that goes a bit too far:
1. Boosters. It may only appear to be perma-damage because harm is frequently inflicted again or worsened by "boosters", overcoming or masking recovery (if any) from prior "vaccine" or "booster" damage.
2. Genes. Some may be disposed to survive the "vaccine" without significant or permanent harm. Others may be especially vulnerable.
I think it can be concluded that a significant % of recipients are perma-damaged or damaged again by "boosters"; perpetuated or worsened by "boosters" is more likely than perma-damage & no chance of recovery. That has the advantage of providing hope, and incentive to stop "boosting". Otherwise, "if I'm perma-F'd anyway, I might as well stay boosted to keep my doc & lefty pals happy."
"The PREP act protects against civil liability only. This behavior is criminal. These people are not protected...I plan on filing a complaint..."
Good, but does PREP shield against *all* civil liability? e.g. Normally fraud can be grounds for civil damages too. Does PREP shield civil liability for things like intentional fraud?