Are we getting closer to a consensus that Coronavirus is real?
They don't want to kill off just a few million people with side effects. The shot reduces symptoms enough so they survive in the event of a mutation that is deadly to people who haven't taken the shot. They need to survive in order to transmit the new deadly variant to large numbers of people. That way they can target who dies, which will be the impoverished and disobedient.
After proving a tiny minority can control more people more easily (think the China model), you would want to end the party because you are so sick in the head?
This is precisely why; they want to impose it globally. The smart way to do this is through great upheaval.
Coors Field can hold over 50,000 people. Why so few bullets?
The smart way to fake events is to "foil" them.
I heard it was five.
My theory is that they NEED some of the people in those countries to get the shot so they can pass on the deadlier variants to kill off a significant number of people there.
Betteridge's law of headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
Coming to a nation near you!
EDIT: And how can you believe the virus is fake? This matter has been closely examined by a very large number of people.
Here is the problem with the hypersensitive population: they die from it and don't transmit it to others.
The Chinese system (also used in other countries) is explicit in that the homeowner does not own the land under it and is only permitted to have a house there. It is unlike systems that tax assets.
Advisors. Experts.
She has had all sorts of episodes in public.
It is not so much "one sided" as it is a public relations endeavour.
Trump winning has been exposed already. Nothing more will happen.
Also it doesn’t matter what OS you use because they are all run by these people.
Well, it might now, but in the end, it will be at the hardware level.
I've thought about this but came to a different conclusion. It stemmed from a thought experiment that goes something like:
We can deploy one of two missile defence systems. System A will stop 80% of the missiles, but the other 20% will get through. System B has an 80% chance of stopping all the missiles and a 20% chance of stopping none of the missiles. Which should we deploy?
So, now imagine the following:
We have a virus that will kill 2% of people. We have a shot that is untested, but could prevent those deaths, but there is a 20% chance it will kill 10% of people. So half the people should get the virus and the other half should get the shot.
But I don't think that's what is going on. I think they developed the shot to reduce symptoms enough to allow a variant to emerge that is deadly enough to kill a large percentage of people who didn't take the jab. They intend to play politics and supply chain shenanigans so that target groups die from not getting the shot in time.
You had damn well better know what to do.
This is actually good information.
u/dukey did not say the official story was true. He said it was very likely shot down.
This is interesting. I think they are going for an incomplete rollout so that the people without access get clobbered by a deadly variant manufactured inside the body of one of those who got the shot. To do this they need a rather large number of people at actually take the shot so they can act as carriers. The tourists alone won't be enough to infect the large numbers they intend to kill off.
EDIT: I think this is why the "relief" packages are one-off shipments. To ensure most don't get it.
If person X does not do Y then my proposition Z must be true.
That's okay. According to the news it's part of a big lie.
This is not as economically efficient as capitalism! They just claim it is on CNN.
What this model does is give them power over you. They can live with the lower efficiency.
The problem of service denial has already started in the form of being denied the right to free speech online, but it is most certainly not the only problem with this way of doing things.
Yours is a wonderful comment. If a company offers a (fill in the blank)-as-a-service its stock valuation increases. Drug companies would do just about anything to create a situation where everyone on earth must take their shots at least every year for their entire lives. However, one aspect (your first example) strikes me as not quite right.
- Buying house -> Renting one
Renting and landlords have been around for hundreds of years. The new model for land ownership is modelled after the Chinese system. You can have a house, but you get permission from the government to place your house on the land and cannot own the land. They have already copied this model in places like Thailand and the idea is to impose this sort of "land reform" on the rest of the world.
The vaccine rollout has unfolded with stark divisions along party lines, as signaled by the fact that all 18 states that surpassed President Biden’s goal of having 70% of residents at least partially vaccinated by July 4 voted for him in the 2020 election. A handful—Mississippi, Louisiana, Wyoming and Alabama—are yet to surpass even a 50% vaccination rate.
They did this on purpose. They are doing it in Hong Kong too.
EDIT: The UK is trying to do this to developing countries. https://conspiracies.win/p/12jJQ0kAUt/england-set-to-lift-covid-restri/c/
I couldn't find evidence for this.
And they are not going to put someone to death for using nudge theory on behalf of the deep state.