Below is a thought-provoking article by Undercurrents. First, a few preliminary comments:
I do not believe the MSM propaganda scapegoating the unvaccinated. I believe the dissident scientists such as Robert Malone, who courageously speak the truth, even though they’re being maligned for doing so.
We’ve been lied to since early 2020. This is not about public health. This is all about power, about dividing us for the sake of imposing a totalitarian regime incrementally.
As for poisoning children with the jab, I’ve addressed that here: https://thinkforyourself.life/2021/09/30/the-plan-to-give-the-jab-to-children-ages-5-to-11-is-highly-irresponsible-86-of-children-in-the-clinical-trials-had-adverse-events-some-very-serious/
The crux of the issue is that children have a 99.997% recovery rate from CV19, but an 86% adverse reaction rate to the Pfizer clinical trials.
Considering that vaccinees shed and transmit as much virus as unvaccinated people, how could one even postulate that unvaccinated people are susceptible to severe disease whereas vaccinees are still largely protected from severe disease?
Frankly speaking, this doesn’t make any sense at all. So there must be a ‘small’ detail the current ‘narrative’ overlooked.
It’s a good question, because even though we’re being told that the ‘vaccines’ are less effective in preventing transmission, we’re being assured that they are still proving effective in preventing serious disease. But it’s only older people and those who are immune-compromised who are susceptible to serious disease. So, if the ‘vaccines’ do not prevent transmission of delta, why on earth are we vaccinating children? Even though the ‘vaccines’ are said to be still protective against severe disease, children are not susceptible anyway, because they have very strong innate immunity. Geert picks up on this theme…
View original post 1,204 more words