Covid 19 virus plus vaccine was meant to kill us.

[Milk-Drops]

Lol. Hateler's rampage that snuffed dissent is not nonsense. Nor is the fact that the SPECIFIC vax, called the c19 vax, is bad, "nonsense".

How is it bad nonsense?

People make mistakes. He thought it was a good idea. And mabye he didnt want the Left to have a valid talking point if they accused him of being an "anti vaxer". (even though people's support for vax is NOT all-or-nothing, you can absolutely support some and reject others.) Plenty of Trump voters and fans also disagree with this move. But we cant alter the events of the past, themselves, but can learn from mistakes. The benefits Trump gave us far exceeded the negatives.

No, you made the claim that the vaccine was as extreme as Hitler's genocide. Trump pushed for the vaccine, so for consistency You would need to hold that Trump was equal to Hitler. You can also say Hitler made a mistake, but it doesn't change the moral stance. So how to do you square that you support someone that did something as bad as Hitler?

 

[Milk-Drops]

It does smell like there was an agenda behind the whole thing be it leaders knew about it or just went with the " just went with it" as many confessed.

2 weeks to flatten the curve.

Based on the data at the time, it was to prevent overrunning hospitals after what happened in Spain and Italy.

Just need everyone to social distance.
Just need everyone to stay home.

These were measures that came into place when the curve was not flattened.

Pumping everyone with fear. Problem, reaction, solution.

Yep, News media mixed with a novel situation.

They wanted a 90% jab quota

Yep, thats how herd immunity works.

and the only way to get that is to pump fear into the masses.

No, the vaccine was also made free and widely available. Also you are skipping over how the vaccine was given in stages based on risk factors. It wasn't rolled out all at once and forced on the whole populace.

That's why all world globalist elites and Leaders praised the past Leader of my country as she managed to get 90% of the population to comply out of fear and hard rules in the name of saving lives. My country was the most praised by the world we setting the example.

The higher the jab rate in a country the higher those in authority were praised as they could convince there masses to get it yet they had to go tyranny to get it. It was like a competition.

Or, people were praised for accomplishing a goal to help get a novel virus under control.

Not by free choice because aint no one going to get 90% of a population to do something they want by free choice. It was by pumping everyone with fear, and when many had got it out of fear and its still quite low, then it was no jab no job, only those jabed are allowed to fly or go out to a resautrant and cafe and have a good time, and so on, trying to get there quota of 90% as they said was the target. And those who did not take it were now suddenly the ones placing other peoples lives at more risk.

Yeah it sucks, but compared to world war 2. This was nothing.

 

[Corn Pop]

No, the vaccine was also made free and widely available. Also you are skipping over how the vaccine was given in stages based on risk factors. It wasn't rolled out all at once and forced on the whole populace.

Nothing is free my friend. The governement purchased the products at the tax payers expense. As far as I remember and I agree it was given in stages yet they said they wanted at least a 90% general rate and then they used no jab no job as one way to try get there, and also jab passports where only jabed allowed entry to enjoy a coffee or a meal and everyone else must stay home unless they get it.

No jab no job policy, and people can argue if that is called forced or not , and I would argue that it was force and I will give my reason as to why.

The leader after come out and tried to play it down and said it was a choice and no one was ever forced to take the jab, yet if someone relies on an income to pay the rent and feed there family and that is there survival and income and its is held hostage over them as most people live week to week, then I would call that force.

Forced to consume some companies experimental for profit product or they were not allowed to go to work and would have to find another way to pay the rent and feed there children the next week.

I mean everything is a choice, yet if someone made the wrong choice they were told they were not allowed to pay there bills for survival. There is a difference between a choice and a free choice. A free choice has no peanlty attached where a choice can jave a penalty attached. Someone choose not to wear there seatbelt but if they get caught they gone to get a penalty. They had a choice but it's not a free choice, it's called a mandate. You are forced to wear a seatbelt and make the wrong choice get a penalty. No jab, well find another way to feed your children next week.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Nothing is free my friend. The governement purchased the products at the tax payers expense. As far as I remember and I agree it was given in stages yet they said they wanted at least a 90% general rate and then they used no jab no job as one way to try get there, and also jab passports where only jabed allowed entry to enjoy a coffee or a meal and everyone else must stay home unless they get it.

No jab no job policy, and people can argue if that is called forced or not , and I would argue that it was force and I will give my reason as to why.

The leader after come out and tried to play it down and said it was a choice and no one was ever forced to take the jab, yet if someone relies on an income to pay the rent and feed there family and that is there survival and income and its is held hostage over them as most people live week to week, then I would call that force.

Forced to consume some companies experimental for profit product or they were not allowed to go to work and would have to find another way to pay the rent and feed there children the next week.

I mean everything is a choice, yet if someone made the wrong choice they were told they were not allowed to pay there bills for survival. There is a difference between a choice and a free choice. A free choice has no peanlty attached where a choice can jave a penalty attached. Someone choose not to wear there seatbelt but if they get caught they gone to get a penalty. They had a choice but it's not a free choice, it's called a mandate. You are forced to wear a seatbelt and make the wrong choice get a penalty. No jab, well find another way to feed your children next week.

Ok, what you are talking about is very surface level in this issue. You do have a choice with the vaccine, but like everything in life their ate consequences to your choice. There was no evidence that anything bad would happen to you of you took the vaccine, there is evidence that if you didn't take the vaccine and got covid it would hit you worse and had a higher spread window.

People then looked at most people nit taking the vaccine as people more concerned with ego than the health of society. You reject society so society rejects you. That is the consequence of your choice. If you want to be a hard line individualistic then you have to accept that you will not always fit in with society.

 

[Corn Pop]

People then looked at most people nit taking the vaccine as people more concerned with ego than the health of society. You reject society so society rejects you. That is the consequence of your choice. If you want to be a hard line individualistic then you have to accept that you will not always fit in with society.

If people believed the jab would make them more safe then they should have felt protected if they did get infected and not pumped with fear to see the unjabbed as some sort of threat towards them. The unjabed would have been most at risk and the most vulnerbale and should have had been the one who feared the most if that was the case.

The leader at the time in my country admitted to there being 2 classes of people in society with more rights that others , and then went on to say it in the same statement it was about confidence and people feel safer knowing they are around other jab people. So she's admitting she made the rules out of her own belief system. And that's a lie, because some were brainwashed to fear, yet many acturally didn't care. Aside from a brainwashed few, the mass majority of the jabed people I knew had no problem being around me that I was unjabed, but because of the Leaders own personal belief she made her own rule from her belief that divided the people.

Just because she might not have wanted to be around the unjabed in her own personal choice and some people might have agreed, that does not mean everyone else agreed, and to mandate a personal belief over the entire nation that divided the nation into 2 classes of people, with more rights for her pwrsonal belief, thats just power tripping.

 

[Corn Pop]

The rules where the jabed were allowed out to enjoy a meal and have a coffee and those who were not jab had to stay home was not based on a personal belief that the jabed felt safer around the jabbed as the leader said it was about confidence.

So someone unjabed was not allowed to go out and have a meal with there family even the business who would serve them did not care they just forced to follow the rules, and there family members did not care, and alot of other people around them did not care, it was just because some individual claimed they cared and decided to enforce that rule based on there own belief, simply because they claimed they cared and some other brainashwased people might have also cared because they were pumped with so much fear it turned them human phobic. Just catering to the most fearful and phobic people. If people were that phobic and fearful then they should just stay home.

If someone makes a rule and says it's about people's confidence and the jab did want to be around the unjab obviously the decision was not based on science more just a personal preference.

Everyone either goes out equally or stays home.equally. Equal rights.

 

[Corn Pop]

People then looked at most people nit taking the vaccine as people more concerned with ego than the health of society. You reject society so society rejects you. That is the consequence of your choice.

Brother, No one rejected society yet some people in society got rejected by the state for doing no wrong and commiting no offense, and that can be said for many wrongs done throughout history especially against minorities.

It's the reason why civil and human rights are written in law, it's to protect everyone equally and minorities against unfair treatment by the state and persecution, like creating two classes of people in society and giving more rights to one group of people and less rights to others.

 

[Corn Pop]

At least she was honest and telling the truth for once, most people who go on power trips expose themselves they cannot help themselves.

Divided the nation and gave more rights to some people in society than others in society based on her own personal belief and opinion, not based on any science. Just giving less rights to some people in society when they had done no wrong and commited no offense.

 

[Corn Pop]

Emergency powers giving basic dictatorship where the leader of a Nation can simply claim and assume the majority of people in the nation don't want to be around a minority and see them as a threat so force the minority or those who don't agree with there personal belief to stay home so others can go out and enjoy a meal.

Creating two classes of people in society and assuming one class is morally greater and the other is a threat even they done nothing wrong simply didnt have the same views they did. That's just wrong.

It's a lie and wrong and only just causes division and arguments, all over some multi billion dollar companies experimental product.

I only say what I say because if I think something is wrong I will give my opinion on it that people might see and understand and that these things should not happen as i have always believed in people being treated eqaually under the rule of law and human and civil rights. I do not hold a grudge against anyone. I am not offended, i already been locked in a worse cage before than being told im not allowed to go to a venue while other people are allowed to have a good time. I just say it the way it is in my own opinion when someone has done no wrong.

The time where only the jab was allowed out and the non jab had to stay home was a tool to drive up jab rates that was admitted and also based on an individuals assumption and generalisation.