Asymptomatic transmission lie of COVID, inferior innate & natural immunity, equal risk of severe outcome if expose regardless of age & baseline risk lie, overcycled PCR 'process', recurrent infection
Asymptomatic transmission lie of COVID, inferior innate & natural immunity, equal risk of severe outcome if expose regardless of age & baseline risk lie, overcycled PCR 'process', recurrent infection
pre-omicron etc., & many more FAKE COVID PANDEMIC lies, yet let me ask, if we give a pass to some, don't we for credibility also give a pass to Fauci, Collins? Tell me for my brain is exploding
If a person was conned, well, they were conned. Pity them. But if they committed fraud, and if they proceeded with malice aforethought, that's different-- those are crimes.
Saying to a patient or an employee, "I recommend that you get vaccinated"-- that's not a crime if -- IF-- you yourself were conned. But even if you were conned, telling someone that "you have to take this injection or I will fire you / give you a dishonorable discharge / make you go on leave without pay / wear a mask / segregate and shame you-- that is a crime. It is a crime because it violates another person's human rights. Right there, there are a lot of people who need to be held accountable before the law, and victims who to need to be made whole again.
Fraud is fraud. That's not rocket science to identify. Knowing that the jabs were killing and injuring people, saying nothing, trying to hide it and then telling the public that the jabs are "safe and effective," that is fraud and malice aforethought.
As for people having said stupid things (Arnold Schwarzenegger, I'm talking about you, and I'm also thinking about a good number of my own friends and relatives), well, if we want free speech, by definition that means we have to put up with other people believing and saying things we don't like or even find despicable. So I defend citizen Schwarzenegger's right to say what he infamously said: "f**k your freedom." That's what freedom looks like. Yeah, it's kinda kerazy ironic. Fortunately, our founding fathers grokked it. Freedom of expression is at the top of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights.
So, in sum, it's one thing to heap scorn on people who, having glugged the Kool-Aid, said offensive things and did such rude and cruel things as disinviting people to their weddings and Thanksgiving, etc. (I do heap scorn on them, if I bother to think of them at all), and it is another, very different thing to prosecute those who have committed crimes. And I say everyday: May those who have committed crimes be held accountable before the law.
We should tread carefully here. There have been plenty of examples throughout history of humans (we must call them that) doing very inhumane things to other humans. This is no exception. The difference I see is the number of humans involved. It is quite interesting that, when you leave it up to us, the humans, we hardly get the big questions ..... right?
We have come to a place, an intersection if you will, in which we think we have it all figured out. Typically, when these intersections are approached, we are led to take the wrong turn. (History lessons abound). This is a very dangerous place we sit as we gaze down both choices with really no way of knowing which is the correct choice; we really suck at these. Like no other time in humans history are we in need of help from above. Pray and pray hard, our lives depend on it........
First and foremost, no one gets a pass without admission and contrition. Second, no one in a position of public responsibility ie. those whose job it is to protect the public EVER gets a pass. Third, anyone that knowingly or unknowingly, through ignorance, malfeasance, or professional misconduct, took actions that directly or indirectly caused harm must be held accountable.
Maybe give a pass to those who thought they were right but were actually wrong. They must get full and public credit for their wrongfulness. Again, admission and contrition apply
" ... What about Bourla, his vaccine….why not praise him?…for his Pfizer death shot based on fraud research studies etc…"
Actually, for his Pfizer shot, Bourla was awarded the "Genesis Prize [which, according to www.genesisprize.org]recognizes and celebrates Jewish talent and achievement, honoring individuals for their accomplishments and commitment to Jewish values."
How to decide?
Easy.
If a person was conned, well, they were conned. Pity them. But if they committed fraud, and if they proceeded with malice aforethought, that's different-- those are crimes.
Saying to a patient or an employee, "I recommend that you get vaccinated"-- that's not a crime if -- IF-- you yourself were conned. But even if you were conned, telling someone that "you have to take this injection or I will fire you / give you a dishonorable discharge / make you go on leave without pay / wear a mask / segregate and shame you-- that is a crime. It is a crime because it violates another person's human rights. Right there, there are a lot of people who need to be held accountable before the law, and victims who to need to be made whole again.
Fraud is fraud. That's not rocket science to identify. Knowing that the jabs were killing and injuring people, saying nothing, trying to hide it and then telling the public that the jabs are "safe and effective," that is fraud and malice aforethought.
As for people having said stupid things (Arnold Schwarzenegger, I'm talking about you, and I'm also thinking about a good number of my own friends and relatives), well, if we want free speech, by definition that means we have to put up with other people believing and saying things we don't like or even find despicable. So I defend citizen Schwarzenegger's right to say what he infamously said: "f**k your freedom." That's what freedom looks like. Yeah, it's kinda kerazy ironic. Fortunately, our founding fathers grokked it. Freedom of expression is at the top of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights.
So, in sum, it's one thing to heap scorn on people who, having glugged the Kool-Aid, said offensive things and did such rude and cruel things as disinviting people to their weddings and Thanksgiving, etc. (I do heap scorn on them, if I bother to think of them at all), and it is another, very different thing to prosecute those who have committed crimes. And I say everyday: May those who have committed crimes be held accountable before the law.
ZERO amnesty!
.
Those first to admit
What they were wrong about.
And what they want to be right about
Moving forward - will advance.
The rest will be left, forsaken,
To find their own way home.
.
No passes on death!
Can even one of these medical clowns prove transmission of any virus? Nope, never been done.
We should tread carefully here. There have been plenty of examples throughout history of humans (we must call them that) doing very inhumane things to other humans. This is no exception. The difference I see is the number of humans involved. It is quite interesting that, when you leave it up to us, the humans, we hardly get the big questions ..... right?
We have come to a place, an intersection if you will, in which we think we have it all figured out. Typically, when these intersections are approached, we are led to take the wrong turn. (History lessons abound). This is a very dangerous place we sit as we gaze down both choices with really no way of knowing which is the correct choice; we really suck at these. Like no other time in humans history are we in need of help from above. Pray and pray hard, our lives depend on it........
Just sayin
First and foremost, no one gets a pass without admission and contrition. Second, no one in a position of public responsibility ie. those whose job it is to protect the public EVER gets a pass. Third, anyone that knowingly or unknowingly, through ignorance, malfeasance, or professional misconduct, took actions that directly or indirectly caused harm must be held accountable.
Maybe give a pass to those who thought they were right but were actually wrong. They must get full and public credit for their wrongfulness. Again, admission and contrition apply
" ... What about Bourla, his vaccine….why not praise him?…for his Pfizer death shot based on fraud research studies etc…"
Actually, for his Pfizer shot, Bourla was awarded the "Genesis Prize [which, according to www.genesisprize.org]recognizes and celebrates Jewish talent and achievement, honoring individuals for their accomplishments and commitment to Jewish values."
That's high praise indeed.
And Weissman and Kariko got the Nobel.