December 6, 2022

The particular Solidarity Argument for Compelled Mass Vaccination Turned Out to Be Fake

Already when the vaccines were launched, it was known which they would not protect from the spread of infection.

We now have the data in black and white from Pfizer itself: already when the vaccines were launched, it was known which they would not protect from the spread of infection. And yet, lots of people have taken the vaccine, due to the fact of the heavy social pressure felt through the solidarity argument. Therefore , they have also risked dire side effects, while these responsible all of a sudden deny that this absolute argument never really had been crucial.  

This was just a confirmation of what we already knew. Still, when Dutch MEP Rob Roos asked a yes/no question to Pfizer’s representative Janine Small, it was nonetheless a historic  moment .

Had the shot been tested before it was launched to see whether this protected against the spread associated with Covid-19?

The answer was  No,   followed by an awkward laugh and a term salad:   ” We had to really move with all the speed of science to understand what is taking place in the market… ”

Let that sink in. Pfizer has known all of along that these injections have zero greater proven effect on the particular spread of infection compared to an ice lolly.

Once again, this is absolutely nothing new. Peter Doshi, among the editors of the  British Medical Journal   informed   us already two years ago that the vaccine manufacturers’ clinical trials were not made to answer the most relevant queries.

However , the particular announcement in the European Parliament still set off a powerful tidal wave, which should sweep together some of those who have spread plus fueled this lie. I am talking about heads of state and top bureaucrats, epidemiologists plus experts, editors-in-chief and superstars. Just to mention a few.

When Johan Carlsson, the director general of the Swedish public health agency (Folkhä lsomyndigheten)   in office at the time, declared in a well-attended press conference in June 2021 that they now recommend teenagers aged sixteen and above to take the Pfizer vaccine, he cited three main reasons for this:

The first and most important: Vaccines protect the person against illness…

The second reason is the fact that vaccination reduces the risk of the infection spreading among young people…

The third reason is that the spread of infection to other age ranges also decreases somewhat once the age limit for the vaccination offer is lowered.

Was Carlsson himself tricked by the vaccine manufacturers? Or even did he deliberately mislead the press corps existing and the Swedish people?

When a public narrative starts to fall apart, it can have got unforeseen consequences. After all, if a public official lie will be exposed and people are forced to understand they have been profoundly fooled, the follow-up question may well existing itself: If they can then lie about something this substantial, what else have these people been lying about?

To prevent a dominospiel effect to that consequence, these people now try to minimize destruction, such as what Reuters’ ” fact-checker” did with the following tweet:

Posts online are saying Pfizer “ admitted” that the company did not check whether their COVID-19 vaccine reduced risk of the infections spreading prior to rolling it out – something these were not required to do, nor claimed to have done.

Virtually anybody ., they have, albeit nicely wrapped up at times. In The month of january 2021, shortly after the launch, Pfizer wrote on Twitter that their vaccines “ have been emergency approved to prevent individuals from the age of sixteen from getting covid-19. ”

In-may of this year, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla   participated in a live dialogue at the World Economic Discussion board. When asked why anybody should get vaccinated if there is now a treatment for Covid-19, Bourla replied: ” The primary thing is not to get the illness to begin with, and therefore you should get vaccinated. In this way, you also protect all those you love. ”

CJ Hopkins writes in Off-Guardian that ” fact-checkers” should be called ” gaslighters, ” since what they really do is engage in psychological manipulation. Gaslighting  means   that you systematically give food to your victim false info and make them question the actual know to be true. Ultimately, they end up doubting their own perception, their memories and even their sanity. In other words, a kind of crazy making.

The  ” masses”   Hopkins  writes ,   “ having forced themselves to believe whatever you needed them to believe during the Shock-and-Awe phase, have to force themselves to think they never believed anything you needed them to believe after that, and believe whatever you need them to believe now. ”

The kind of historical revisionism that Reuters’ ” fact-checker” engages in; we have seen a great deal of that because the EU Parliament debacle. All of a sudden parts of the mainstream mass media pretend as if they by no means heard about any promises regarding protection against the spread of infection.

I phoned Swedish radio and get connected to the news desk for your daily news show Ekot. I ask how long they have been aware of the discovery throughout the questioning of the Pfizer representative. The woman I was passed on in order to dismissesed my question simply by saying that no authorities possess claimed that the vaccine would certainly protect against the spread of infection, but that they just have maintained that it protects against serious illness and demise.

I objected by saying that the mantra of the Swedish public health company, Folkhä lsomyndigheten:   ” It protects against serious illness and demise, ”   is something that they switched in order to at the end of 2021. Before that will, the mantra also included the vaccine protected against the distribute of infection. This is simple to check via older variations of the Swedish public health agency’s own website, one example is from the autumn of 2021, when they wrote:

” Vaccination effectively protects against getting seriously ill or dying from covid-19. It also defends against getting infected and infecting others. ”

However the woman at the news table insists that the agency never ever claims that the vaccine might protect against the spread associated with infection. The conversation seems surreal. I remind her of the well-attended press meeting where the then director common of the public health agency claims exactly that, yet she hangs up on myself. –   I have been following this issue throughout the outbreak, so I know what I am talking about!

We are not convinced that the woman  at the news desk was lying deliberately. This may also be a question of serious denial that comes into play when reality gets too much to bear. Mark Twain said that it’s easier to fool people compared to it is to convince them they have been fooled. The author Upton Sinclair added that it is not possible to make a man understand some thing if his livelihood depends upon not understanding it.

For anyone prepared to remove the blinders, the announcement from Pfizer should prompt a sobering period.

I wonder what they are saying today, all those principals and teachers who pressured their own students to take the photos.

What will the particular reactions be from companies who have laid off unvaccinated or denied them employment?

What do all performers and celebrities who urged us in costly strategies to “ roll up our own sleeves” and ” consider one for the team, ” so that we could hug again, say now?

What will be the excuse from editorial writers and columnists, from right to left, who also all competed to condemn the unvaccinated?

What does Peter Kadhammar say today? In a chronicle in  Aftonbladet   last autumn he talked in favour of the unvaccinated paying for their own healthcare, since  “ they sabotage society’s attempts to combat a lethal pandemic. ”

All you well-paid bullies; what are your comments to the vaccine not having been tested for its ability to stop the spread of infection?

And what about the friendships that were ruined and the relations that were terminated because of the tough feelings that vaccine passports and malicious media confirming brought along?

In her  survey   ” Livet i vaccinpassens skugga”   (Eng:   ” Life in the shadow of the vaccine passport, ”   our translation ),   Diana Blom selection interviews some of those who were harassed plus socially excluded in their workplaces. We also get to meet college students who lost their internships, and a faithful church goer who was refused to attend Christmas Day service.

Apart from nonsensical tragedies, we now have also witnessed absurd farces, such as when the unvaccinated top ranking tennis champion Novak Djokovic was banned through defending his title at the Australian Open on the reasons that he was a risk associated with infection.

Even if many things  seem comical, they stop being amusing when you consider all those hundreds of millions of people worldwide who have taken their jabs because they were obliged to do so. How many have suffered unwanted effects? How many have died or are dealing with chronic effects?

Only in Sweden, 104. 000 people have reported suspected side effects, while it is well known from research that only 1-2 percent of all side effects are being reported.

In my  interviews   with the physician Sven Romá n, he  informs   me that will myocarditis and pericarditis is an extremely common side effect with guys aged 13 to 18 right after receiving their second dosage of the mRNA vaccines, that the increased number of menstrual problems have been observed, that male fertility may be affected as the amount of births per fertile female in Sweden has reduced drastically since the vaccination started, and that many pathologists worldwide report an increased incidence of fast-growing cancers in relatively young people.

As an increasing number of irregularities have become known, I believe we will become used to seeing more traditional revisionism of the kind we are already familiar with from other sensitive fields.

Within 2017, the Swedish open public service television, SVT, transmit the exclusive and recognized American documentary  The particular Vietnam War , by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. The title alone is deceptive, both from the moral and a geographical viewpoint.   The Vietnam War   should, according to activist Noam Chomsky, be called The Crucifixion of Southeast Asia, to capture the monstrous destruction which was the result of history’s most powerful military-industrial empire which, for over ten years, used its full push against a poor peasant community as well as the neighbouring countries associated with Laos and Cambodia.

While the documentary will present strong eyewitness balances and for that reason alone is worth seeing, it describes this criminal offense against humanity throughout using euphemisms such as “ heartbreaking mistake, ” “ most of intentions, ” and “ good faith. ” Wa had the best of purposes too, but unfortunately some mistakes were made. Shit happens.

This is the way I believe the historical revisionists will portray the criminality – the deliberate lies and the baseless discrimination – that has caused millions of people, who does otherwise never have taken these types of injections, to now experience serious health problems.

Portraying the crimes of states and authorities as accidents at work is accepted because it resonates with exactly how most people would wish the world to be. We do not wish to believe that authoritative bodies purposefully commit psychopathic deeds. The idea that our decision-makers would have released vaccine passes despite realizing that the injections did not control the spread of infection is horrible.

The tendency for wishful thinking that sometimes turns into denial resembles the dynamics in families with abuse troubles. The child who speaks out there often faces anger and accusations of lying. Another children want to keep the picture of their father as the family’s provider of safety and security.

Psychopaths can also nurture the image of being engaged and responsible individuals. Pfizer’s VD Albert Bourla reminds me personally of  The Mask of Sanity , the first book that will in detail explains psychopathy as being a phenomenon (published in 1941). As the title indicates, psychopaths learn to behave as if they had been normal – otherwise they will not be able to have effective careers. But since everything is definitely theatre, they sometimes uncover themselves and the mask drops.

This is what happened during the above-mentioned discussion in the World Economic Forum by which Pfizer’s CEO participated.

Bourla gripes regarding “ A very fanatical group of anti-vaxxers” wishing to take Pfizer to court. He then begins to rant: ” They will declare that the sun didn’t go up mainly because people were vaccinated. ”

” The face mask of sanity” falls for a moment.

I wonder what Cindy Darell, the handball player through Gö teborg that I recently interviewed, would say about Bourla’s joking ways, so bereft of empathy? The girl was healthy as a equine before taking the shots. But since taking them, she has not been able to play for an entire year. She has suffered inhaling and exhaling difficulties, pressure in the chest and a tingling sensation on her left side. Her friend who also took a 3rd dose (Cindy stopped on two) suffered cardiac arrest.

I know a lady whose 18-year-old son got the shots to be able to study abroad. He died in his sleep shortly after. The mother continues to be in shock, but will be thinking of suing Pfizer, if at all possible. What does  she   think about becoming dismissed as a superstitious trick?

Right after Pfizer’s announcement in the EUROPEAN UNION Parliament  last month, I contacted a friend on Facebook who expressed their full support for the vaccine passes, at the time they were in use. I was convinced that he would have second thoughts now that this individual found out the entire foundation for the vaccine passes – they were meant to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated – was based on a lie.

But he thought the topic was no more an issue.

” I have moved on! I don’t care anymore, none about Covid, nor in regards to the vaccines or the vaccine passes. Enjoy your evening!

Another vaccine passport advocate I actually contacted didn’t believe the particular message from Pfizer has been any cause for problem.

” I am sure that many wrong choices were made during the pandemic, but now people carry on as usual. Maybe it’s time to move on? ”

Again, I think of the United states documentary on Vietnam. The final part is about the end from the war. President Jimmy Carter didn’t believe the United States due neither compensation nor apologies since ” the destruction was mutual. ”

You could, of course , argue that the United States experienced lost 58, 000 soldiers while they had killed close to 5 million people, which the Vietnamese troops had in no way invaded the US, nor dispersed millions of tons of Agent Orange on the fields of Ca and Ohio, or drowned naked Americans in napalm, etc .

The closing message of the documented is nevertheless that the ” war” had been devastating meant for both sides, and that it was time to turn the page and move on. The Beatles’ hit  Let It Be  is played during the credits.

Picture if the Holocaust had been portrayed similarly. No Nuremberg demo, no Aftermath Agencies, simply no awareness campaigns, no led tours to Auschwitz, simply no Remembrance Day on January 27 th . Just a quiet word associated with advice to leave the particular tragedy behind and move on.   Let It Become. Let It Be.

Someone else who would like us to turn the web page and move on is former Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. About a year ago, she urged the Swedish people to” pause most of hugs” from the unvaccinated. As a result, she also condoned state-sanctioned bullying.

She actually is in good company. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett compared the unvaccinated to terrorists walking the roads with machine guns capturing (i. e. infecting) the particular innocent. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the unvaccinated racists.

The obvious question is if these oppressive heads of state understood at that time that the vaccine had not been tested from a point of view associated with infection control. If so, should they not have to get held accountable? And if they themselves had been misled, must not those who misled them become held accountable?

Let It Be.   Now they want us to change the subject and proceed. Putin brings new terrible headlines, and the ‘ Ministry of Truth’ is already busy rewriting history in new gaslighting tweets.

As George Orwell stated in his dystopia  1984 : Which controls the past controls the near future. Who controls the present regulates the past.

PS

A brief time before submitting this piece, I obtained an email reply from the community health agency confirming which they knew that Pfizer had not carried out any studies around the vaccine’s ability to protect against the spread of infection at the time of that press conference within June 2021. The public wellness agency, however , claims the motive for the decision had not been a reduction in the spread of infection, but rather ” was based on the assessment the benefit of the vaccination has been more important when it came to the kids at that particular moment during the pandemic when the decision was made. ” Hence, not the three reasons how the Director General in workplace at the time gave during the press conference and that I cite above.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *