Reporter Sharyl Attkisson pretty much single-handedly destroyed the "swine flu" narrative, namely that the entire episode was a MASSIVE hoax and that the vast majority of alleged "swine flu" cases tested NEGATIVE for the so-called "H1N1" virus.
Yet, even the conspiracy theorists were diehard that THEY had the DREADED swine flu.
This taps into humanity's basic desire to be "a part" of things.
"I was sick, it must've been SWINE FLU!"
No, you fell for media hysteria and predictive programming for the COVID hoax.
"I tested "positive" for "H1N1".
No you didn't, the tests were faulty and FOIA requests revealed the "pandemic" never existed.
I'm now seeing the swine flu "faulty memory" phenomenon with COVID, but exponentially worse.
"I got COVID! I had a runny nose and couldn't taste or smell!"
The "couldn't taste or smell" is probably the most retarded talking point of all...that's LITERALLY a symptom of the common cold. You can't taste or smell if your nose is stuffed up for a week.
WTF is wrong with these people?
People want to "belong" so badly they literally convince themselves they have a disease that doesn't exist?
I can't help but see a parallel between these blinders and those from people currently trapped in COVID lockdown.
I spent many years warning Australians to GET OUT of their country while they still could. I saw Australia as being among the first to fall for the NWO.
I received STRONG pushback from even the conspiracy theorist Aussies who refused to see the forest for the trees.
I take zero joy or comfort being right.
Let's start thinking ahead.
How do we undo the damage of this fake pandemic that clearly will be with us for a century or longer?
How do we get people to realize that COVID is a hoax without causing a mass existential crisis in the population? Perhaps that's the only way to wake us from our slumber?
We need more info on this event you are describing. How was she allowed to do it? Who were the players? What were the arguments?
"How do we get people to realize..."
I will theorise on potential solutions.
People's behavior is controlled by emotions and not logic. Two powerful drivers are fear and reward.
"We" cannot reward the people for the desired behavior. In most cases rewards means $$$. Our dear leaders sorted this one out with the money printers.
However, insitlling fear is possible. Punishment of not belonging to the powerful group. Think Vietkong tactics. Think Antifa. Think BLM. They all shared certain practices. That's just my two Gwei' worth
We also need to understand. ..
Was it fear from.the media or government mandates that drove the desired behaviour?
In other words would people continue living as.normal if governments.did.not impose.lockdowns?
I dunno, I was sick with something about two months back. Sick as a dog for about 10 days. I still can't smell anything...
Never had that happen before from any other illness.
I'm not drawing conclusions, just sharing my experience.
The media fooled you. Suggestion is very powerful.
If you weren't told about "swine flu" you probably wouldn't have gotten as sick.
It sucks finding out that what you believed was a personal experience was a lie.
Check out Sharyl Attkisson's reporting. There was no H1N1 epidemic, and you didn't have swine flu.
Sorry to burst your disease bubble.
If you witness what happened to our predecessors back in the 20th Century, this appears to be it.
When the decade-long lockdowns/"Final solution" start being implemented for real, the rest of the Century will be used to hold the "Killers who are not killers" accountable.
That is called the conflict of reason aka the conflict between those who believe that the suggestion (swine-flu) is true or false versus those who not believe that the suggestion (swine-flu) is true or false.
Notice that both sides within reason are in conflict about the same suggestion (swine-flu)...this is called division (reason) by suggestion (-ism) used by the few to control the many.
Every suggestion represents a contract between choice of suggestion and responding choice of consent; yet choice represents a reaction to balance. Therefore...to consent by choice to suggested choice represents the ignorance of using choice in reaction to balance.