Hear from Senator Johnson, champion of the vaccine injured, Mark Meuser who is running for US Senate, and Joel Wallskog, an orthopedic surgeon who is unable to work anymore due to his COVID vax injury
See this link to view the video of Comments and the many Californians in opposition at around 1 hour mark during the Judiciary Committee CA State Assembly meeting who ended up still voting for on SB 866 to go forward to the Assembly floor:
Steve -- You've been offering the other side a "debate" for quite a while without success. But maybe the resources of the VSRF can help in getting COVID-19 pseudo-vax proponents to answer some of your questions.
Instead of a "debate," characterize the interaction as a workshop or working group meeting.
I used to practice aerospace structural dynamics engineering for a living. Back then, one of the big debates was whether component-level vibration testing was sufficient to ensure that the spacecraft would not break during launch, or if testing of the entire spacecraft all at once was needed. There were differing views within the technical community of NASA (JPL vs. GSFC), The Aerospace Corp. (representing USAF), spacecraft and launch vehicle manufacturers, test facilities, and specialized consultants. A key community interaction was the annual Spacecraft & Launch Vehicle Dynamic Environments Workshop, where interested parties would present and discuss their findings. After more than a decade, consensus was eventually reached and industry guidance documents were released (such as MIL-STD-1540 and NASA-HDBK-7005).
In these and other technical meetings that I've attended or run during my career, a formal set of minutes would be approved at the end by all parties to document the subjects discussed, key agreements and disagreements, and action items for any future meetings.
In the case of such a meeting with Professor Marty Makary, Dr. Damania, et al., I suggest that you propose a workshop to answer perhaps 5 or 6 basic questions agreed to in advance by all parties. Each side would present their findings on each question, with the presentations to be sent beforehand. Day One of the workshop would be for each presentation followed by detailed Q&A in the morning. Leave the afternoon open for people to gather data/analysis in order to answer questions that came up in the morning session. Day Two morning to review any new data and continue Q&A. Afternoon would be for capturing/agreeing on meeting minutes. I assume there would still be some disagreements, but at least those would be documented and out in the open.
Key questions might something like:
* What are the documented statistics on those who were previously infected (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) with COVID-19 becoming re-infected?
* What are the documented statistics on those who were previously infected (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) with COVID-19 transmitting the disease to someone else if they've become reinfected?
* What is the documented Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNTV) to prevent a single COVID-19 fatality in each major age group (e.g. kids aged from 5 to 11)?
* What is the VAERS Under-Reporing Factor for 2020, 2021 and 2022, and what is the consequent calculation of VAERS Excess Deaths for each year?
* What is the calculated Risk:Benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccination as stratified by age?
* Why are vaccines showing negative efficacy after several months?
* Etc.
The workshop could be held virtually, like the VSRF meetings, to make it easy for people to attend. That also would eliminate one excuse by the other side to not attend.
Steve - you should do what Jeff Childers does. He does a weekly multiplier. He encourages his followers to donate to a worthy candidate or non-profit. He instructs his followers to end whatever amount in a 2 so they can be counted. It is utterly amazing how much he raises for candidates and non-profits. I've donated to 3 or 4 of them. Pick a number (to end the donated amount in) and ask your followers weekly to donate to candidates.
Turns out Pfizer was correct about their vaccine being safe and effective... as an abortifacient. And only compared to coat hangers.
Is Senator Johnson anti-choice when it comes to abortion? I think a compromise needs to be made here. An amendment that unconditionally defends bodily autonomy. No vaccine mandates, no body-violating restrictions on abortion.
Since one considers abortion murder and another considers abortion as a medical procedure, it doesn't make sense why abortion was addressed at the federal level. Murder is handled by the states' criminal codes and states enact medical boards which handle licensing and medical procedures. Vaccines as medical procedures or murder should be state responsibilities as well.
If one really considers abortion to be murder then wanting it to be left to the states is a morally cowardly position. If it’s murder then you should be demanding for it to be banned in all states. If it’s not murder on the other hand then it should be legalized in all states just like how segregation is illegal in all states and how vaccine mandates should be illegal in all states. When it’s a matter of civil rights it should be legal everywhere. Unfortunately stuff such as child protective services is left to the states. That’s probably why the issue doesn’t get any attention. People are more worried about fetuses dying mostly at an age at which they can’t feel pain or suffer than they are about post-birth children suffering from foster parents that enslave them. I was virtually enslaved by my foster parent, my twin sister still is (we’re 32 but she’s under conservatorship like Britney Spears) not allowed to contact me, living a life that I think is worse than death, but I put up with that for eight years because I was afraid of ending up with worse such as a pedophile.
Not even for early-term abortions if it will prevent late-term abortions? In Europe they limit abortions more than in the US - not out of religious fundamentalism, but because of hangups about Nazism and such, maybe out of population concerns too - but it's paid for by the state.
I think we all should be responsible for our own bodies, and so long as a baby is in a woman's body, it's her business. The choices she makes are between her and her conscience, and between her and God. It's a heavy burden, but that's life. If I feel like helping to provide early abortion services in an effort to prevent late abortions, as you say, including for victims of rape or incest, that should be my choice, and I can set up a foundation to do that if it doesn't already exist. I don't think the government should compel others to do it too. Let's keep government small and personal responsibility big.
I don’t think the government should be small if the corporations are big. The government should match the size of the corporations. Small government for small companies, big government for big companies. Instead we have the reverse.
For real. Pro-lifers are the Wokesters of the right. It's fundamentally the same issue. They want your bodily autonomy to be violated for the sake of saving someone's life. The jabboholics want your bodily autonomy to be violated for the sake of saving someone's life. I suspect if they thought of the fetus as a human being and not a clump of cells they would want to ban abortion for being racist or something as they clearly don't hold bodily autonomy as a core value (this also shows in their reactions to the Rittenhouse verdict).
Johnson too I feel for. He worked a career, then got into politics. I think he had originally planned to step aside but realised he cannot. There’s no one else who gives not a single f*** what the establishment thinks about him. Shameful.
I’d cheer a Trump / DeSantis card. Flip the Veep to POTUS in ‘28.
RFK Jr. might be the only person whose integrity we can be sure of, and whose name gives him immediate popularity with Dems. And whose convictions about the Covid fraud gives him credibility with Republicans. He would have to run as an independent. As for Trump, yes he's better than anyone the Dems would nominate, but his continued endorsement of the vax is unforgivable.
If only he could be persuaded to run. But he knows he might not survive because the *** would be plotting against him just like they were with his relatives.
I can’t express enough thanks to your crusade and being a truth soldier in this war against medical freedom against the medical apartheid and fight for the human race and against trans humanism and track and trace society 💕🙏🏻💕
SB 866 passed the CA Senate this morning. They are wanting to sign into law that 12 year olds to make their own decisions to get a vaccine, etc. They are ok with sidestepping parents rights?
Those? IMPO (In My Prayerful Opinion) they violated them a very long time ago. My children were exempted from having "jabs" when they were in school because of religious beliefs. Now, all children to enter schools here have to have a bucu number of them. Sadly, CA has become literally a Nazi-controlled state. I post publicly on MeWe.
There is a whole page about eugenics in California.
This vaccine however appears to be dysgenic. It’s killing everyone except for the really stupid anti-vaxxers and the people smart enough to understand mRNA science who probably don’t breed anyway, and people who refuse the vaccine because they have no social life which means they’re probably dysfunctional. All the normal high-functioning people that society runs on are getting it.
No. I don't believe that all the people "running society" are getting jabbed. But just maybe they want us to think so! Personally, I believe that it is "normal" not to choose to be shot with Nazi poison.
The video in this article showing the conflicts of interest is fantastic: https://rumble.com/vp54nt-what-is-trusted-news-initiative.html. The picture of the students in tents to avoid Covid is enlightening. You could save more lives putting people in tents before their McDonalds or Crispy Creme order arrived than anything related to Covid and tents(1). Covid mania. Thanks Covidians!
(1) This statement does not have a double-blinded, randomized control trial with a 95% confidence interval that has been peer-reviewed and further had the underlying data open-sourced for the scientific community at large to further analyze, but instead merely represents the fact checking (er... opinion) of the author.
HA! That girl in the tent? How about where my daughter and family live in Tennessee? Early on the playground equipment was totally wrapped in plastic wrap! lol At whose expense?
Great lineup of speakers! I have been hearing about Mark Meuser and am in his California district so am going to vote for him. The Republicans in California need all the support they can get; as you say the Democrats have gone from progressive to authoritarian. I used to be one of them but no longer.
Part 2 of my “deep thoughts” on Covid Covid “narratives." Part 1 tried to show that "conventional wisdom" that is often false or dubious is used to justify policies that control the lives of virtually every world inhabitant. "Those who control the narratives control the world."
How does one really change/correct even one bogus and harmful narrative? Is this even possible?
Hope hasn’t been extinguished yet. It’s possible. However, when the entire system is staffed with people who have massive incentives to to protect fraudulent narratives, this is probably not likely.
The best strategy might be to try to harpoon one bogus narrative. The thought here being that if the masses belatedly realized that their “trusted” authorities had told a giant whopper about A, the same people might realize that these infallible experts might have also told a whopper about B, C, D … and Z. (This example also tells us how important it is to the Bad Guys to not be exposed for any lie).
There’s nothing the world can do about all the “lockdown” lies since the lockdowns are already largely over (although exposing this fraud would, one assumes, go a long way to preventing future “insane” lockdowns).
However, if the mantra that the vaccines are “safe and effective” was somehow exposed as a lie, one of the most formidable narratives in our lifetimes would instantly crumble.
In a just world, proving this would be easy. But when the Powers that Be control the key narratives, debunking bogus narratives is almost impossible. For starters, the narrative wouldn’t have become the narrative if 200 million Americans didn’t already believe it.
Key question: Can the effects of 20 months of incessant brain-washing or propaganda evaporate in, say, a few days?
Is the co-worker, acquaintance or even family member who shamed me as an “anti-vaxxer,” a selfish individual who was putting the lives of her grandmother or children at risk, really going to say, “Ah, my bad. I apologize for that, Bill.”
It’s also not difficult to identify other details that would flow from such a narrative-destroying epiphany.
Public health officials now viewed as saviors and saints might instantly be viewed as mass-murderers who perpetrated “crimes against humanity.” This would be quite the change in one’s point of view.
And we’re not just talking about the Anthony Fauci’s of the world; we’re talking about all the public officials who spent two years spouting the same lines as the man who (in a just world) might soon be on trial at Nuremberg 2.0 Trials.
This would include an icon of many Republicans, Donald Trump, who considers his “warp speed” vaccination roll-out one of the signature events of his administration … as well as the man who defeated Trump, Joe Biden.
This would include almost every governor and mayor in the country, plus the superintendents of education and college presidents many citizens admire and respect.
Name a CEO of a major company and you have just named someone who accepted Covid falsehoods as truths, and who probably compelled their employees to get a shot that was not effective and could kill or seriously harm said employees (and has probably already killed tens of thousands of Americans).
if they were decent and big enough, every leader of every size-able organization in the world would apologize for getting such a huge issue … terribly wrong.
As one can see from these examples, the exposure of one giant “bogus narrative” entails a level of mea culpas that has never happened in world history.
This said, just because some event lacks precedent doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. Still, I believe this thought exercise shows that it is highly unlikely a “true accounting” of Covid issues will occur … at least in our lifetimes.
The time to challenge false or dubious narratives is when they are first being promulgated, before they are established as infallible truths. After this, too many people and organizations are too invested to admit they may have bought into a giant lie.
Maybe we won't have to actually have them all admit they were wrong. I'm thinking about Nazi Germany as an example. A huge percentage of the country believed in Hitler at one point. When the depth of his madness came to light and he was destroyed, it didn't matter what anyone thought. It was like a giant, irresistible tidal wave that just swept it all away. What became of all those once "true believers?" Most of them no doubt lived out the rest of their lives with a great sense of guilt and shame. It's widely believed the collective guilt of the German people may be one reason why they adopted such crazy policies as admitting huge numbers of refugees.
People are waking up, Bill. According to some spiritually advanced individuals, the entire world is moving into an ascending age from the dark age or Kali Yuga we are leaving behind.
I hope so. Better wake up even faster! I often wonder (like many others I think) if we have passed the "tipping point." That is, is it too late to correct all these things? As my recent posts probably make clear, when EVERY important organization is corrupted, the "house-cleaning" that will be required to give future generations a fighting chance is going to have to be massive.
Looking forward as always to hearing from Senator Johnson. We badly need a politician with his bravery here in captured Canada!
Curious - has anyone read the Lancet study from April 16 about worldwide all cause mortality? I read “death from Covid” but can’t help but wonder, without autopsies, how can causation be separated from correlation. We know of course that many have died as a resilient of mRNA injections, suicide, drug overdose etc, all of which may have been caused tangentially by Covid-19.
Then I read the funding source of the study. The BMGF.
Even if the main causative factor in so many tragic lives lost is the viral infection, likely in many cases in concert with co-morbidities, the criminal act as we now understand, is the utter rejection of proven safe & effective early treatment protocols. Justice must be done!
In the first two paragraphs of this dispatch, Steve summarizes the main results of the last two years. As he points out, most of the “changes” in our world have been “horrible.” Writes Steve:
“The pandemic has brought on many changes, most of them horrible. Progressives stopped being progressive and became authoritarian.
“Then came the insane policies that necessitated the mass censorship of science precisely because these policies can’t bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.”
To expound on these crucial take-aways:
Yes, “MANY changes” have occurred and, yes, "most" of these changes have been “horrible” for world inhabitants (I would argue "all" of these changes have been horrible). They were indeed “insane.”
Among these horrible developments is the fact that “progressives” … “became authoritarian.” I would edit this statement to say that many non-progressives also embraced “authoritarian policies.”
The “insane policies” also “necessitated “mass censorship of science.” I’d add these “policies” were really “mandates,” imposed not by changing laws, but imposed as “emergency orders” issued by mayors, governors, presidents and bureaucrats acting on the bogus or dubious advice of alleged “experts” and “authorities.”
As the world’s remaining critical thinkers have tried to point out, few if any of these “policies” (mandates) could “bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.” Because this is the case, “mass censorship of (real) science” HAD to occur.
I would add that members of the Fourth Estate have also eschewed any real “search for the truth” …. so both real science and real journalism have been discarded.
In a world where alleged “scientists” and alleged “watchdog journalists” refuse to search for the truth, untruths are bound to proliferate. When these falsehoods remain (largely) unchallenged, they become “the (authorized) narrative.”
As ensuing policies that affect every life on the planet are not based on underlying truths, they invariably produce “horrible” results, results that are often the exact opposite of what their proponents assured the public would happen. Thus we get “safe and effective” vaccines that are ineffective and unsafe. Even the “vaccines” are not really real “vaccines.”
Lockdowns designed to “slow or stop” the “spread” of a respiratory virus - thus allegedly preventing large numbers of deaths - did NOT stop the spread of this virus at all. Indeed, these policies produced untold number of deaths and adverse events (health-wise and economic) that otherwise would not have occurred.
The people who tried to make these points have been vilified and/or censored while the “leaders” who pushed the bogus or dubious narratives have been celebrated and given even more power.
The bottom line from these “changes” is that millions of people who should never have experienced economic or health harms have experienced harms to some degree (“harms” ranging from mild and hard-to-quantify up to an including death).
The official narrative says that millions of lives have been “saved” and things would have been far worse if all the draconian “policies” (mandates) had not been implemented.
The real question is WHO should the masses believe is/was right? Today, most world citizens still side with the public health officials, scientists from prestigious institutions, politicians, executives with Big Pharma and the editors and journalists at the mainstream press organizations.
Which begs this question: Why would so many people accept as infallible the pronouncements of these particular people and organizations?
WHY this is so should be clear by now: Because world citizens have been subjected to 26 month of non-stop, largely unchallenged “reporting” that says the “narrative” is/was right.
Things might “change” only when more people realize the “authorized” narratives were bogus all along …. which would mean all our “leaders” who acted on these false narratives were also WRONG. Basically, the world has been listening to the wrong leaders.
If enough people ever reach this conclusion, real change probably WILL occur. But this might also represent the proverbial truth many people simply cannot handle.
Really what would have to happen is for many of my friends who have thought differently than myself for the past two years to ask this question: “Are you guys really saying that ALL of our “trusted” public officials and institutions were wrong about such important topics?”
To which I would have to reply with one word: Yes.
Someone supposedly asked Ben Franklin after a meeting of the Founders, "So what type of government have you given us?" Franklin reportedly answered, "A republic ... if you can keep it." The Founders must have known that most governments end up being authoritarian .... so they tried to create as many "checks and balances" as possible to prevent this from happening. This framework largely worked for two or so centuries, but I think the authoritarians are prevailing in the end. I still think the Fourth Estate deserves more blame than even elected officials or even voters. The Founders did make "freedom of speech or the press" the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution, probably realizing that all freedoms and liberties ultimately depend on a genuinely free press/speech. So when the mainstream press was completely captured (by would-be authoritarians), the last great restraint againt authoritarians disappeared.
See this link to view the video of Comments and the many Californians in opposition at around 1 hour mark during the Judiciary Committee CA State Assembly meeting who ended up still voting for on SB 866 to go forward to the Assembly floor:
https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220601/video
Steve -- You've been offering the other side a "debate" for quite a while without success. But maybe the resources of the VSRF can help in getting COVID-19 pseudo-vax proponents to answer some of your questions.
Instead of a "debate," characterize the interaction as a workshop or working group meeting.
I used to practice aerospace structural dynamics engineering for a living. Back then, one of the big debates was whether component-level vibration testing was sufficient to ensure that the spacecraft would not break during launch, or if testing of the entire spacecraft all at once was needed. There were differing views within the technical community of NASA (JPL vs. GSFC), The Aerospace Corp. (representing USAF), spacecraft and launch vehicle manufacturers, test facilities, and specialized consultants. A key community interaction was the annual Spacecraft & Launch Vehicle Dynamic Environments Workshop, where interested parties would present and discuss their findings. After more than a decade, consensus was eventually reached and industry guidance documents were released (such as MIL-STD-1540 and NASA-HDBK-7005).
In these and other technical meetings that I've attended or run during my career, a formal set of minutes would be approved at the end by all parties to document the subjects discussed, key agreements and disagreements, and action items for any future meetings.
In the case of such a meeting with Professor Marty Makary, Dr. Damania, et al., I suggest that you propose a workshop to answer perhaps 5 or 6 basic questions agreed to in advance by all parties. Each side would present their findings on each question, with the presentations to be sent beforehand. Day One of the workshop would be for each presentation followed by detailed Q&A in the morning. Leave the afternoon open for people to gather data/analysis in order to answer questions that came up in the morning session. Day Two morning to review any new data and continue Q&A. Afternoon would be for capturing/agreeing on meeting minutes. I assume there would still be some disagreements, but at least those would be documented and out in the open.
Key questions might something like:
* What are the documented statistics on those who were previously infected (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) with COVID-19 becoming re-infected?
* What are the documented statistics on those who were previously infected (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) with COVID-19 transmitting the disease to someone else if they've become reinfected?
* What is the documented Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNTV) to prevent a single COVID-19 fatality in each major age group (e.g. kids aged from 5 to 11)?
* What is the VAERS Under-Reporing Factor for 2020, 2021 and 2022, and what is the consequent calculation of VAERS Excess Deaths for each year?
* What is the calculated Risk:Benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccination as stratified by age?
* Why are vaccines showing negative efficacy after several months?
* Etc.
The workshop could be held virtually, like the VSRF meetings, to make it easy for people to attend. That also would eliminate one excuse by the other side to not attend.
There is a deadline approaching. Read the public comment I provided for our nation's participation in WHO here: https://leemuller.substack.com/p/provide-your-input-by-7am-pst-friday
Steve mentioned the liability exemptions for Pharma in the VSRF today. Here is some background on why they really want the shots for kids: https://tomkom2.substack.com/p/the-real-reason-they-want-to-vax?r=qrie2&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Steve - you should do what Jeff Childers does. He does a weekly multiplier. He encourages his followers to donate to a worthy candidate or non-profit. He instructs his followers to end whatever amount in a 2 so they can be counted. It is utterly amazing how much he raises for candidates and non-profits. I've donated to 3 or 4 of them. Pick a number (to end the donated amount in) and ask your followers weekly to donate to candidates.
Turns out Pfizer was correct about their vaccine being safe and effective... as an abortifacient. And only compared to coat hangers.
Is Senator Johnson anti-choice when it comes to abortion? I think a compromise needs to be made here. An amendment that unconditionally defends bodily autonomy. No vaccine mandates, no body-violating restrictions on abortion.
Since one considers abortion murder and another considers abortion as a medical procedure, it doesn't make sense why abortion was addressed at the federal level. Murder is handled by the states' criminal codes and states enact medical boards which handle licensing and medical procedures. Vaccines as medical procedures or murder should be state responsibilities as well.
If one really considers abortion to be murder then wanting it to be left to the states is a morally cowardly position. If it’s murder then you should be demanding for it to be banned in all states. If it’s not murder on the other hand then it should be legalized in all states just like how segregation is illegal in all states and how vaccine mandates should be illegal in all states. When it’s a matter of civil rights it should be legal everywhere. Unfortunately stuff such as child protective services is left to the states. That’s probably why the issue doesn’t get any attention. People are more worried about fetuses dying mostly at an age at which they can’t feel pain or suffer than they are about post-birth children suffering from foster parents that enslave them. I was virtually enslaved by my foster parent, my twin sister still is (we’re 32 but she’s under conservatorship like Britney Spears) not allowed to contact me, living a life that I think is worse than death, but I put up with that for eight years because I was afraid of ending up with worse such as a pedophile.
Yes, regardless of your position it should be handled by the States.
Definitely no taxpayer money for that. I don't want any part of it.
Not even for early-term abortions if it will prevent late-term abortions? In Europe they limit abortions more than in the US - not out of religious fundamentalism, but because of hangups about Nazism and such, maybe out of population concerns too - but it's paid for by the state.
I think we all should be responsible for our own bodies, and so long as a baby is in a woman's body, it's her business. The choices she makes are between her and her conscience, and between her and God. It's a heavy burden, but that's life. If I feel like helping to provide early abortion services in an effort to prevent late abortions, as you say, including for victims of rape or incest, that should be my choice, and I can set up a foundation to do that if it doesn't already exist. I don't think the government should compel others to do it too. Let's keep government small and personal responsibility big.
You got it!
I don’t think the government should be small if the corporations are big. The government should match the size of the corporations. Small government for small companies, big government for big companies. Instead we have the reverse.
That’s dark humour. I confess I chuckled, only briefly, mind.
Yes to Unconditional Bodily Autonomy. On this hill I will, if it comes to it, willingly die.
Me too.
For real. Pro-lifers are the Wokesters of the right. It's fundamentally the same issue. They want your bodily autonomy to be violated for the sake of saving someone's life. The jabboholics want your bodily autonomy to be violated for the sake of saving someone's life. I suspect if they thought of the fetus as a human being and not a clump of cells they would want to ban abortion for being racist or something as they clearly don't hold bodily autonomy as a core value (this also shows in their reactions to the Rittenhouse verdict).
How about a second Kennedy-Johnson ticket for the 2024 election? Only this time, the Kennedy wouldn't be saddled with that scumbag Lyndon.
RFK Jr? Hasn’t he suffered enough?
Johnson too I feel for. He worked a career, then got into politics. I think he had originally planned to step aside but realised he cannot. There’s no one else who gives not a single f*** what the establishment thinks about him. Shameful.
I’d cheer a Trump / DeSantis card. Flip the Veep to POTUS in ‘28.
That’s assuming he survives Florida.
RFK Jr. might be the only person whose integrity we can be sure of, and whose name gives him immediate popularity with Dems. And whose convictions about the Covid fraud gives him credibility with Republicans. He would have to run as an independent. As for Trump, yes he's better than anyone the Dems would nominate, but his continued endorsement of the vax is unforgivable.
I think Zyklon Don is actually worse than the Democrats. The Woke people became something extremely scary under him.
Yes, you’re quite right on both counts. Especially Trump’s idiocy regarding the “vaccines”.
If only he could be persuaded to run. But he knows he might not survive because the *** would be plotting against him just like they were with his relatives.
I can’t express enough thanks to your crusade and being a truth soldier in this war against medical freedom against the medical apartheid and fight for the human race and against trans humanism and track and trace society 💕🙏🏻💕
SB 866 passed the CA Senate this morning. They are wanting to sign into law that 12 year olds to make their own decisions to get a vaccine, etc. They are ok with sidestepping parents rights?
Sounds like this is or could lead to emancipated 12 year old minors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors
what nonsense
Hopefully they are also allowed to refuse it? Some children will be forced by their parents to get it.
Those? IMPO (In My Prayerful Opinion) they violated them a very long time ago. My children were exempted from having "jabs" when they were in school because of religious beliefs. Now, all children to enter schools here have to have a bucu number of them. Sadly, CA has become literally a Nazi-controlled state. I post publicly on MeWe.
ETERNAL LIFE BLESSINGS FOR YAHWEH'S SAINTS!
There is a whole page about eugenics in California.
This vaccine however appears to be dysgenic. It’s killing everyone except for the really stupid anti-vaxxers and the people smart enough to understand mRNA science who probably don’t breed anyway, and people who refuse the vaccine because they have no social life which means they’re probably dysfunctional. All the normal high-functioning people that society runs on are getting it.
No. I don't believe that all the people "running society" are getting jabbed. But just maybe they want us to think so! Personally, I believe that it is "normal" not to choose to be shot with Nazi poison.
The video in this article showing the conflicts of interest is fantastic: https://rumble.com/vp54nt-what-is-trusted-news-initiative.html. The picture of the students in tents to avoid Covid is enlightening. You could save more lives putting people in tents before their McDonalds or Crispy Creme order arrived than anything related to Covid and tents(1). Covid mania. Thanks Covidians!
(1) This statement does not have a double-blinded, randomized control trial with a 95% confidence interval that has been peer-reviewed and further had the underlying data open-sourced for the scientific community at large to further analyze, but instead merely represents the fact checking (er... opinion) of the author.
HA! That girl in the tent? How about where my daughter and family live in Tennessee? Early on the playground equipment was totally wrapped in plastic wrap! lol At whose expense?
Great lineup of speakers! I have been hearing about Mark Meuser and am in his California district so am going to vote for him. The Republicans in California need all the support they can get; as you say the Democrats have gone from progressive to authoritarian. I used to be one of them but no longer.
The Constitution, stupid.
Say it over and over and over.
It resonates with actual Americans, it's like throwing holy water on a vampire to the deep state / WEF creatures.
Part 2 of my “deep thoughts” on Covid Covid “narratives." Part 1 tried to show that "conventional wisdom" that is often false or dubious is used to justify policies that control the lives of virtually every world inhabitant. "Those who control the narratives control the world."
How does one really change/correct even one bogus and harmful narrative? Is this even possible?
Hope hasn’t been extinguished yet. It’s possible. However, when the entire system is staffed with people who have massive incentives to to protect fraudulent narratives, this is probably not likely.
The best strategy might be to try to harpoon one bogus narrative. The thought here being that if the masses belatedly realized that their “trusted” authorities had told a giant whopper about A, the same people might realize that these infallible experts might have also told a whopper about B, C, D … and Z. (This example also tells us how important it is to the Bad Guys to not be exposed for any lie).
There’s nothing the world can do about all the “lockdown” lies since the lockdowns are already largely over (although exposing this fraud would, one assumes, go a long way to preventing future “insane” lockdowns).
However, if the mantra that the vaccines are “safe and effective” was somehow exposed as a lie, one of the most formidable narratives in our lifetimes would instantly crumble.
In a just world, proving this would be easy. But when the Powers that Be control the key narratives, debunking bogus narratives is almost impossible. For starters, the narrative wouldn’t have become the narrative if 200 million Americans didn’t already believe it.
Key question: Can the effects of 20 months of incessant brain-washing or propaganda evaporate in, say, a few days?
Is the co-worker, acquaintance or even family member who shamed me as an “anti-vaxxer,” a selfish individual who was putting the lives of her grandmother or children at risk, really going to say, “Ah, my bad. I apologize for that, Bill.”
It’s also not difficult to identify other details that would flow from such a narrative-destroying epiphany.
Public health officials now viewed as saviors and saints might instantly be viewed as mass-murderers who perpetrated “crimes against humanity.” This would be quite the change in one’s point of view.
And we’re not just talking about the Anthony Fauci’s of the world; we’re talking about all the public officials who spent two years spouting the same lines as the man who (in a just world) might soon be on trial at Nuremberg 2.0 Trials.
This would include an icon of many Republicans, Donald Trump, who considers his “warp speed” vaccination roll-out one of the signature events of his administration … as well as the man who defeated Trump, Joe Biden.
This would include almost every governor and mayor in the country, plus the superintendents of education and college presidents many citizens admire and respect.
Name a CEO of a major company and you have just named someone who accepted Covid falsehoods as truths, and who probably compelled their employees to get a shot that was not effective and could kill or seriously harm said employees (and has probably already killed tens of thousands of Americans).
if they were decent and big enough, every leader of every size-able organization in the world would apologize for getting such a huge issue … terribly wrong.
As one can see from these examples, the exposure of one giant “bogus narrative” entails a level of mea culpas that has never happened in world history.
This said, just because some event lacks precedent doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. Still, I believe this thought exercise shows that it is highly unlikely a “true accounting” of Covid issues will occur … at least in our lifetimes.
The time to challenge false or dubious narratives is when they are first being promulgated, before they are established as infallible truths. After this, too many people and organizations are too invested to admit they may have bought into a giant lie.
Maybe we won't have to actually have them all admit they were wrong. I'm thinking about Nazi Germany as an example. A huge percentage of the country believed in Hitler at one point. When the depth of his madness came to light and he was destroyed, it didn't matter what anyone thought. It was like a giant, irresistible tidal wave that just swept it all away. What became of all those once "true believers?" Most of them no doubt lived out the rest of their lives with a great sense of guilt and shame. It's widely believed the collective guilt of the German people may be one reason why they adopted such crazy policies as admitting huge numbers of refugees.
People are waking up, Bill. According to some spiritually advanced individuals, the entire world is moving into an ascending age from the dark age or Kali Yuga we are leaving behind.
I hope so. Better wake up even faster! I often wonder (like many others I think) if we have passed the "tipping point." That is, is it too late to correct all these things? As my recent posts probably make clear, when EVERY important organization is corrupted, the "house-cleaning" that will be required to give future generations a fighting chance is going to have to be massive.
Looking forward as always to hearing from Senator Johnson. We badly need a politician with his bravery here in captured Canada!
Curious - has anyone read the Lancet study from April 16 about worldwide all cause mortality? I read “death from Covid” but can’t help but wonder, without autopsies, how can causation be separated from correlation. We know of course that many have died as a resilient of mRNA injections, suicide, drug overdose etc, all of which may have been caused tangentially by Covid-19.
Then I read the funding source of the study. The BMGF.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Even if the main causative factor in so many tragic lives lost is the viral infection, likely in many cases in concert with co-morbidities, the criminal act as we now understand, is the utter rejection of proven safe & effective early treatment protocols. Justice must be done!
https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/campaigns/stop-the-who/2022/05/24-hours-left-comment-at-the-stakeholder-listening-session-for-75th-world-health-assembly/74090/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=hhs-ihr-comments
In the first two paragraphs of this dispatch, Steve summarizes the main results of the last two years. As he points out, most of the “changes” in our world have been “horrible.” Writes Steve:
“The pandemic has brought on many changes, most of them horrible. Progressives stopped being progressive and became authoritarian.
“Then came the insane policies that necessitated the mass censorship of science precisely because these policies can’t bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.”
To expound on these crucial take-aways:
Yes, “MANY changes” have occurred and, yes, "most" of these changes have been “horrible” for world inhabitants (I would argue "all" of these changes have been horrible). They were indeed “insane.”
Among these horrible developments is the fact that “progressives” … “became authoritarian.” I would edit this statement to say that many non-progressives also embraced “authoritarian policies.”
The “insane policies” also “necessitated “mass censorship of science.” I’d add these “policies” were really “mandates,” imposed not by changing laws, but imposed as “emergency orders” issued by mayors, governors, presidents and bureaucrats acting on the bogus or dubious advice of alleged “experts” and “authorities.”
As the world’s remaining critical thinkers have tried to point out, few if any of these “policies” (mandates) could “bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.” Because this is the case, “mass censorship of (real) science” HAD to occur.
I would add that members of the Fourth Estate have also eschewed any real “search for the truth” …. so both real science and real journalism have been discarded.
In a world where alleged “scientists” and alleged “watchdog journalists” refuse to search for the truth, untruths are bound to proliferate. When these falsehoods remain (largely) unchallenged, they become “the (authorized) narrative.”
As ensuing policies that affect every life on the planet are not based on underlying truths, they invariably produce “horrible” results, results that are often the exact opposite of what their proponents assured the public would happen. Thus we get “safe and effective” vaccines that are ineffective and unsafe. Even the “vaccines” are not really real “vaccines.”
Lockdowns designed to “slow or stop” the “spread” of a respiratory virus - thus allegedly preventing large numbers of deaths - did NOT stop the spread of this virus at all. Indeed, these policies produced untold number of deaths and adverse events (health-wise and economic) that otherwise would not have occurred.
The people who tried to make these points have been vilified and/or censored while the “leaders” who pushed the bogus or dubious narratives have been celebrated and given even more power.
The bottom line from these “changes” is that millions of people who should never have experienced economic or health harms have experienced harms to some degree (“harms” ranging from mild and hard-to-quantify up to an including death).
The official narrative says that millions of lives have been “saved” and things would have been far worse if all the draconian “policies” (mandates) had not been implemented.
The real question is WHO should the masses believe is/was right? Today, most world citizens still side with the public health officials, scientists from prestigious institutions, politicians, executives with Big Pharma and the editors and journalists at the mainstream press organizations.
Which begs this question: Why would so many people accept as infallible the pronouncements of these particular people and organizations?
WHY this is so should be clear by now: Because world citizens have been subjected to 26 month of non-stop, largely unchallenged “reporting” that says the “narrative” is/was right.
Things might “change” only when more people realize the “authorized” narratives were bogus all along …. which would mean all our “leaders” who acted on these false narratives were also WRONG. Basically, the world has been listening to the wrong leaders.
If enough people ever reach this conclusion, real change probably WILL occur. But this might also represent the proverbial truth many people simply cannot handle.
Really what would have to happen is for many of my friends who have thought differently than myself for the past two years to ask this question: “Are you guys really saying that ALL of our “trusted” public officials and institutions were wrong about such important topics?”
To which I would have to reply with one word: Yes.
Someone supposedly asked Ben Franklin after a meeting of the Founders, "So what type of government have you given us?" Franklin reportedly answered, "A republic ... if you can keep it." The Founders must have known that most governments end up being authoritarian .... so they tried to create as many "checks and balances" as possible to prevent this from happening. This framework largely worked for two or so centuries, but I think the authoritarians are prevailing in the end. I still think the Fourth Estate deserves more blame than even elected officials or even voters. The Founders did make "freedom of speech or the press" the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution, probably realizing that all freedoms and liberties ultimately depend on a genuinely free press/speech. So when the mainstream press was completely captured (by would-be authoritarians), the last great restraint againt authoritarians disappeared.