patrick.net

Dumnass took the jab for the same reasons, no?

Additionally, even after all of the mask, test and vaxx failure, Democrats are still pushing these obviously counterproductive interventions because abandoning this nonsense would be tantamount to admitting the Scam. And that would be a bad look.

Saying only say that “Mistakes were made” rings as hollow as a serial adulterer explaining the failure of his marriage by saying, “We just grew apart.”

Regardless of what happens going forward and which form of Corona revisionism gains currency, “The Party of the People” has opportunistically done tremendous, permanent damage.

They need to own it. The media needs to say it. Neither will happen.

But without such a reckoning, the divide they created won’t just fade away. Because people like me have long memories. And the Scamdemic-induced damage will be so obvious and lasting that there will be many opportunities to remind the lockdown/school closure/vaxx supporters of the harm they caused.

https://markoshinskie8de.substack.com/p/refusing-to-admit-that-coronamania

Additionally, even after all of the mask, test and vaxx failure, Democrats are still pushing these obviously counterproductive interventions because abandoning this nonsense would be tantamount to admitting the Scam. And that would be a bad look.

Saying only say that “Mistakes were made” rings as hollow as a serial adulterer explaining the failure of his marriage by saying, “We just grew apart.”

Regardless of what happens going forward and which form of Corona revisionism gains currency, “The Party of the People” has opportunistically done tremendous, permanent damage.

They need to own it. The media needs to say it. Neither will happen.

But without such a reckoning, the divide they created won’t just fade away. Because people...

It seems the only way the scam can really be exposed if billions die from the jab.

It seems the only way the scam can really be exposed if billions die from the jab.

“In a recent Twitter thread, a Twitter user named Daniel Hadas lays out an excellent description of what the last three years were really about:17

“The debate over whether, when, and to what extent lies were told about COVID vaccines preventing transmission misses a central point: No matter what the trial data showed, the vaccines were ALWAYS going to be pushed on entire populations, by fair means or foul.

Very early on, the COVID response was locked into a specific narrative. The world would lock down and stay safe, while brave scientists hammered away at a vaccine … You may recall that, in the first months of COVID, there was a lot of breathless talk about whether there would EVER be a vaccine.

This was all nonsense … Our authorities would not have adopted the strategy of lockdown-till-vaccine unless they were certain a vaccine could and would be made …

The purpose of sowing fear that there might never be a vaccine was to increase gratitude and enthusiasm when one came along. Indeed, every part of the early COVID response can be understood as (in part) pre-release marketing for the vaccine …

That’s why COVID risks for the young were wildly amplified. That’s why there was unending obfuscation of the central role of infection-conferred immunity both in protecting individuals and in ending the pandemic.

The plan was that the vaccine would be met by a perfectly primed population: immunologically naive, desperate to be released from lockdowns, terrified of COVID, eager to do the right thing, i.e. protect others through taking the shots.

Once so much effort had gone into priming, it is UNIMAGINABLE that authorities would have pivoted to telling us … ‘Well, actually, the vaccine’s safety profile is only so-so, efficacy is murky, and most people don’t need to worry about COVID anyway. So best most of you not take this … Sorry about the lockdowns.’

That was not in the script. So it was inevitable that the vaccine be pushed on everyone, and inevitable that the best arguments for universal vaccination would be used. Those arguments were: COVID is super-dangerous for YOU. Distrust in this vaccine is distrust in science. Refusing to get vaccinated is immoral, because you will infect others.

The veracity of these claims didn’t matter: they were in the script, and it was too late to deviate … Accordingly, the stage was also set for vaccine mandates.

None of this is conspiratorial. It is descriptive … Clarifying the details won’t alter the essence of the picture — The COVID response was determined by a script of vaccine salvation, and societies’ investment in that script was too deep for mere realities to divert its execution.”

Once More on Renowned Fool Emily Oster, and the Malign Influence of Head Girls More Generally

Our governing elite are increasingly selected not for intelligence or ability, but for conscientiousness, agreeability and conformity. The consequence is a new kind of midwit tyranny. ...

Oster ticks all the boxes here. She was a star student and athlete in her school years, and her public presence is about projecting a pro-social, positive conformist image, while using superficially analysed Science and Data to calm neurotic mothers worried that they’ve strayed beyond the boundaries of what is medically optimal or socially acceptable. She doesn’t like closed schools very much, but she just loves vaccines.




... Since 2000 especially, Head Girls have cemented their dominance across a great many bureaucratic institutions and white-collar professions, and they have used their growing influence and seniority, above all, to recruit and promote more Head Girls like themselves. The problem is that traits like conscientiousness correlate not at all with raw intelligence and ability. Thus, our world has come to be steered by fleets of extremely agreeable, deeply concerned, highly productive and overly socialised Emily Osters—midwits who have very few original thoughts, and who make up for that by caring a lot about what other conformist midwits of similar status think about them.

Vaccine Roulette Part 3 - Including a patient who came back for a second bite at the apple after experiencing adverse events following both dose 1 & dose 2
Dose 1 Severe Adverse Event, Dose 2...? You'll have to get jabbed with Dose 2 to find out

Ashmedai
16 hr ago

Welcome to the Post-Nuremberg Ethical Apocalypse
This is the third installment of case reports of vaccine injured patients receiving another dose nonetheless.

Crowdsourcing request: what are the steps in the conversion process from true believer to vaccine abolitionist?
Our work gets easier if we understand, at a granular level, the worldview of the people we are trying to convert

If a parent witnesses a vaccine injury first-hand they often convert fairly quickly from true believer to vaccine abolitionist (although even in that case I believe that there are several steps in the process including: denial, dissonance, initial research, rigorous research, anger, and evangelical abolitionism).

But what are the steps in the conversion process for people who have not witnessed vaccine injury first-hand? I’ve been wanting to figure this out for several years now and it’s surprisingly difficult. ...

Level: -7

Thought-terminating cliché: “No one has ever been injured by a vaccine.”

Commentary: Absolutes are pretty easy to counter. At this step one just has to get them to admit the possibility of some injury.

Question to help them move up: “What can you tell me about the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program?”

Level: -6

Thought-terminating cliché: “Okay yeah sure, bad things happen occasionally. But it’s one in a million and the benefits vastly outweigh the harms.”

Commentary: Here the person admits the possibility of some injury but makes up a number so that it remains virtually impossible in their mind.

Question to help them move up: “Have you noticed the rise in chronic illness in children? When we were growing up no one had peanut allergies or required Epi pens. Today it seems that most children are dealing with something — asthma, allergies, autoimmune disorders, eczema, diabetes. Why do you think that is?”

Level: -5

Thought-terminating cliché: “It’s just better awareness — we’re better at detecting things these days — and probably too much screen time, video games, and junk food.”

Commentary: This one is fascinating. It’s a variation on the Candide/Pollyanna view that “this is the best of all possible worlds.” The claim is that there is no problem, it’s just that we are too sensitive, too empathetic, too good.

Question to help them move up: “From what I’ve read, over half of all kids are chronically ill. Do you really think that our parents’ generation just did not notice a problem that large? I agree that screen time and junk food contribute to the problem. Do you think there might be additional factors or do you think those are sufficient to explain the entire phenomenon?”

Level: -4

Thought-terminating cliché: “Well I imagine pesticides probably don’t help. I don’t know what I think of Roundup. However, the government would never allow them to sell it at Home Depot if it was actually bad for us. In sufficient quantities, I guess anything can cause cancer.”

Commentary: This is a child-like view that government is Santa Claus and is here to help us. Also, when someone has not really thought things through, there are many internal contradictions in how they describe their views.

Question to help them move up: “Have you researched the pesticide, Atrazine? How do you think it got approved? Did you know that the vaccines on the childhood schedule have liability protection? You literally cannot sue the company if something goes wrong. What incentives do companies have to improve product safety if they have liability protection?”

Level: -3

Thought-terminating cliché: “They would never do that to us. Doctors and scientists have a lot to lose. We owe them a debt of gratitude.”

Commentary: This is an “argument from authority” — a common logical fallacy. It’s the corporate version of the “government loves us” argument above.

Question to help them move up: “How did the thalidomide disaster (1957-1961) happen? What about the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (1932-1972)? Have you ever seen a drug rep. inside your doctor’s office? How do financial conflicts of interest impact decision making?”

Level: -2

Thought-terminating cliché: “No system is perfect but I don’t think vaccines are as dangerous as you think they are.”

Commentary: This is a sort of bargaining with reality. They don’t know the numbers but they are desperately trying to stay in the cocoon of ignorance.

Question to help them move up: “Have you ever met the parents of a vaccine injured child? Do you want me to introduce you to some? If I invited you to a conference on this topic would you join me and listen to the speakers with an open mind?”

Level: -1

Thought-terminating cliché: “Okay, yeah, there are harms, and those are tragic. But the benefits are so enormous. Vaccines have saved hundreds of millions of lives over the last 100 years.”

Commentary: This is a Fairyland Risk/Benefit Argument that is not based on any actual study, it’s just clichés and wishful thinking. It represents someone clinging to the shore of comfortable lies before setting sail for the truth.

Question to help them move up: “If I brought you a book on this topic would you be willing to read it and give me your thoughts?” [And then give them Dissolving Illusions, Turtles All the Way Down, Unvaccinated, or Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Safety Studies.]

Level: 0

Worldview: “I don’t like the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule. It’s too many, too soon. But some vaccines are necessary. We’re going to go with an alternative vaccine schedule.”

Commentary: This is a great start and should be highly praised. But there is still no science here — just a different bargain with a system that is fundamentally flawed.

Question to help them move up: “I’m so glad that you are avoiding some of these vaccines. But how do you calculate the risk from each particular vaccine vs. the risk from the disease itself? Did you know that none of the vaccines on the U.S. schedule were tested against an inert saline placebo? If I gave you an article on this topic would you be willing to read it and share your thoughts?” [And then, if they are agreeable, give them the 2018 ICAN Letter to HHS or direct them to my article, “Why I’m an Abolitionist.”]

As someone is beginning to see the truth, we should invite them to subscribe to The Defender and watch The Highwire. You can also invite someone to your house for a movie night to watch Vaxxed, Vaxxed II, 1986 The Act, or any of your other favorite medical freedom movies.

Level: +1

Worldview: “I think I’m ready to stop vaccinating my kid, but how do I protect him/her from disease and what do I do if s/he gets sick?”

Commentary: When one disconnects from the Pharma Death Cult Society there is a period of transition as one learns about the parallel society of alternative medicine. We should do everything we can to support this transition and help people to find connections with their new tribe.

Question to help them move up: “Yes we use allopathic medicine for emergencies — broken bones and that sort of thing. But we find that functional and integrative medical doctors are so much better for everything else. This is a fantastic time to find alternative providers who are a good fit for your values.” [And then you can share names of healers who you like. Jim Meehan, James Neuenschwander, and Larry Palevsky are beloved doctors in the movement. For anything Covid-related, FLCCC is doing brilliant work. I’m also a huge fan of the work of Dr. David Brownstein and the Health & Wellness books published by Chelsea Green.]

Level: +2

Worldview: “I’ve had it with the corruption and lies of the pharmaceutical industry and the government. But there is nothing that we can do — they are so powerful.”

Commentary: Even once people come over to our side there is still a learned-helplessness that must be overcome.

Question to help them move up: “Corrupt systems are brittle and they can fall apart quickly. There are so many groups working on this — state medical freedom groups, ICAN, Stand for Health Freedom, CHD, NVIC. They would all welcome your involvement and support.”

Level: +3

Worldview: “This is a genocide. How do we stop it?”

Commentary: This is the reality, the red pill. If we are to survive as a species, we must act.

Reply: “Welcome to the revolution. We’ve been waiting for you. The messed up system that we are all working to overthrow is centralized. We are decentralized. So what are your talents? And how can you best apply your creativity and wisdom to overthrowing the system? Let’s freakin’ go!!!!! 🙌”

John Smith
Nov 16
·
edited Nov 16
Liked by Toby Rogers
This is very well structured, Toby, and is a great reference for the typical (covid) vaccine apologists, at least on the philosophical debate level.

As for your question, I have had no success with respect to changing anyone's mind, or even making any headway at all.

I think it's even more difficult now because the entire covid vaccine has been misleadingly politicized by the media. So people who have certain political identities, have grafted on the covid vaccine adherence as part of those identities.

So if you're arguing against the vaccine, they see it as you arguing against their very own conception as a person.

It's even taken on a religious quality, where it's part of the secular religion of being a good person. They obviously want to remain perceived as a good person by their peers. Criticizing the vax is thus ego suicide to their political identity and ethical identity.

Therefore it's something they are going to go to absurd lengths to avoid. It can explain why you will show a case study showing the most horrific reaction to the covid vaccine, such as this one https://archive.ph/7Ph9Z and they will pretend it doesn't exist. Pretending it never happened is less painful than having to reconceive themselves as a person and contemplate how they have been duped by the people they thought had their best interests in mind.

Because people in Florida felt relaxed, proud and confident, and because they had never been held indoors against their will, told where to stand, stripped of their holidays by the state, or forced into submitting to poisonous unchosen injections, there was a rhythm to social life there still. People from all walks of life chatted away with one another; the lady who wrapped up the sandals I bought chatted away with me, she chatted with all who come in; the chiropractor I visited chatted away with his customers, the salad shop workers chatted with the people who dropped off the bagels, the lady moving her grocery cart around me made a jolly, friendly remark. All this complexity took place in a peaceful, almost measurable rhythm. ...

I have felt that something is now discordant, jarring, in how we in the “lockdown” states relate to each other post 2022. The contrast with Florida showed me what it is: we in the rest of America have had our community rhythms broken off; silenced.

Now, as we start up our lives again, our interactions are tentative, awkward, erratic. Do we chat with the checkout girl? Do we not, as she is just trying to breathe behind her mask? Did she get out of the habit of chatting, if unmasked now? Do we drop in on a friend? Or do we zoom now forever? Do we hug, shake hands, not hug, not shake hands?

Or do we never again just embrace, just kiss, just stop by?

It’s all smashed to smithereens.

@plaforscience
This may help you understand why Covidians reached such an acceptance and even enthusiast promotion of inhuman restrictions; even now, once they acknowledge the strong proof against most of them, both for being useless and for collateral damage they bring

The Slippery Slope

The powers that be did a lot of research on what messaging created the best compliance with taking the jabs. I believe guilt messaging was the one that won out, so it meant communicating how you needed this product to protect other vulnerable members of your family. Although employee mandates pushed many people into getting the Covid “vaccine,” family pressure played at least as much, if not a larger role. How many elderly mothers hinted that they wouldn’t be able to see their adult children at Thanksgiving unless they got the vaccine? How many brothers and sisters tried to convince their family members that they and their family all got safe and effective and were feeling great?

Think about the consequences of that if the pressured person died suddenly. Would that family member ever be able to reconcile the guilt if they had pressured others to take it? Some of the reason that the jabbed as a group seem unwilling to see the carnage the Covid vaccines have created is because they can’t live with themselves if they were the cheerleaders for this genetic slurry. It would force them to accept guilt for having caused the death and injury of loved ones.

Your moment of Zen

Sometimes the barriers to freedom are only in our minds.

@_B___S
According to his owner, "He constantly thinks the screen door is closed, so we have to pretend to open it for him to come inside."

TFish
3 min ago
The imaginary door is a perfect metaphor for now.

The pharma-medical control over the minds of people, and how they think about health, is exactly the same thing.

People have been brainwashed and taught to distrust their own minds and bodies to such a profound degree: taught to believe in the necessity of drugs—pills and injections—over caring for one’s self. This is why some people continue to wear masks and take the jabs, why they swallowed the narrative uncritically.

https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/thinking-points-november-22-2022

plaforscience
This may help you understand why Covidians reached such an acceptance and even enthusiast promotion of inhuman restrictions; even now, once they acknowledge the strong proof against most of them, both for being useless and for collateral damage they bring

The Slippery Slope