patrick.net

Chilling. But over stylizing does detract from a just-the-facts presentation on this public-private murder campaign.

A video worth sharing, but a hopefully minor quibble - why the stylized panning of the departed wife's car at the start with mood music? Are we to believe that the police kindly got out of the way to allow filming? Probably not. And this type of pointless dramatization cheapens the film, number 1, and (SPOILER ALERT!!!!), number 2, a deceased "victim" who did not die from the gene therapy, but who committed suicide cause she would have lost her bus driver's job if she didn't get gene therapied!? WTF!? Why not lead in with an actual gene therapy myocarditis or clot death victim? Is there a hidden agenda - that your deaths are your own fault? And the whiney husband equally portrays simpy powerlessness. Was he leeching off her income? It just smells bad. Unecessary, because the rest is pretty good except for the start and the end. What gives?

If it were informed consent what would be different? It would be ok?

If people were truly informed as to the danger and utter inefficacy of the "vaccine", then no one would take it.

Patrick says

If people were truly informed as to the danger and utter inefficacy of the "vaccine", then no one would take it.

And that’s why they’re sticking with uninformed consent.
“Hey I got a free candy shot, you want?”
“Is it safe?”
“It’s safe AND delicious! And it keeps you from dying!”
“Sounds great I’ll take three!”

Consent was given, but not for what was actually offered.

Patrick says

If people were truly informed as to the danger and utter inefficacy of the "vaccine", then no one would take it.

After a point, I just get fed up with people believing a group that I've been pointing out to them for YEARS lies all the time.

I have a new rule with friends and colleagues. I'll tell them once, but I won't repeat it. If they ASK me, I will explain why I have my position, if they ask for how I formed my opinion, I'll show them the sources I used to make that conclusion.

Patrick says

If people were truly informed as to the danger and utter inefficacy of the "vaccine", then no one would take it.

Then how can anyone be forced to take it? What laws are on the US books that keep anyone from forcing you to take a jab?

WineHorror1 says

Then how can anyone be forced to take it? What laws are on the US books that keep anyone from forcing you to take a jab?

There ARE laws on the books to keep people from forcing others to take it.

What good are they?

We do not have a judicial system.

Patrick says

If people were truly informed as to the danger and utter inefficacy of the "vaccine", then no one would take it.

Agreed.

Nothing says "We gave you the best information we had" and then trying to lock away the raw data from public view for decades