Good speech by an epidemiologist critical of the ‘vaccine’ for being a toxin with unknown long-term effects and “unsafe for human use.”

Dr. Peter McCullough ‘Therapeutic Nihilism And Untested Novel Therapies’ | AAPS

https://rumble.com/vnc5yk-dr.-peter-mccullough-therapeutic-nihilism-and-untested-novel-therapies-aaps.html

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

He promoted HCQ, which saved lives, but was censured for doing so.

He said, “there has been a suppression of treatment to promote fear, suffering, loneliness, isolation, hospitalization, and death in order to promote the vaccine.”

And “The disability that we are going to see from these vaccines will go down in history as an unbelievable atrocity.”

“We have the biggest human catastrophe on our hands in human history with a medicinal product, and we’ve had two administrations buy into it, we’ve had…all the houses of legislation buy into it, we’ve had the entire medical establishment buy into it, and the whole media, and no one knows how to stop it. No one knows how to stop this freight train, and we’re all witnessing it right now. The deaths, 50 percent of them occur within 48 hours of the shot, 80 percent occur within a week…”

“We are in the free fall of a lawless state.”

Alarmed about the 5,000 cases of myocarditis, he said, “The vaccine is not safe for children and should not be mandated.” This is true: children have a 99.997% recovery rate from Covid-19 but an 86% adverse reaction rate to the jab, yet it’s being pushed on them anyway. See my article on this.

Not only are the vaccines not safe, he said, there is no protection for research subjects – us. He pointed out that the vaccines have had zero effect on the pandemic curve, and that once a vaccine falls below 50% protection and can’t last a year, it is not a viable product on the commercial market. Essentially, it has failed as a commercial product.

In Israel, the Delta vaccination outbreak is bigger than their pre-vaccination outbreak.

Dr. McCullough correctly pointed out that it is not the virus that dictates mortality, it is how we respond to it through treatments. Many doctors have proven again and again that early treatment saves lives.

A very important point Dr. McCullough made was that “if we vaccinate people who have natural immunity, we harm them considerably” and that we should leave the naturally immune alone. However, “if we have a break in the vaccine cabal,” he said, “it will be the naturally immune.”

_______________________________________

This site below goes into the “adverse events” (negative side-effects). He calls what’s happening a catastrophe. I applaud his courage for stepping up against the entire propaganda machine.

About the speaker:

Peter Andrew McCullough is an American cardiologist. He was vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and a professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, McCullough advocated for early treatment including hydroxychloroquine, dissented from the [corrupt] recommendations of government public health agencies.

Of course, the Wikipedia site calls his statements “medical misinformation.” Whoever is writing Wikipedia is paid by Big Pharma. I trust a doctor charged with medical misinformation more than those who push toxic drugs on me.

__________________________________

Further commentary by Think for Yourself

Dr. McCullough is among thousands of what could be called credible ‘dissident’ physicians and scientists who have testified against what’s going on — including the inventor of the mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone. They have been wrongly maligned and silenced in the media and social media, leading millions of people to permanently distrust state-sanctioned and pharmaceutical-corporation-funded medical authorities.

Yes, there are less than credible voices out there there that confuse the situation and with whom the credible doctors are often lumped; I am not talking about them, but about credible physicians who have raised alarm bells regarding what’s going on, despite the risk to themselves, and who should be listened to. The first one I became aware of was Dr. Byram Bridle, whose excellent and informative report is here.  Many hundred have since arisen to testify, and every time they do the pundits try to beat them down with the label of ‘medical misinformation.’

I call them dissidents as a badge of honour, similar to the political and medical dissidents of the USSR who objected to the distortion of science and medicine by Stalinism (e.g., Dr. Zhores Medvedev). We’re witnessing something similar now, as honourable scientists have been scapegoated in the media and censored on social media for pointing out the numerous ethical violations and high cost of what’s happening now, and for questioning what can only be called mass hysteria. The numbers do not justify economic lockdowns (that don’t work anyway), or ethical violations such as forcing medical procedures on people unwillingly. If it were the Bubonic plague (which killed a third of Europe at the time) the argument for such measures could be plausibly argued, but for a disease with such a high recovery and low transmission rate, it’s unwarranted. It’s doing far more harm than good.

Excerpt from the speech: “We have the biggest human catastrophe on our hands in human history with a medicinal product. We’ve had two administrations buy into it. We’ve had …all the houses of legislation buy into it. We’ve had the entire medical establishment buy into it, and the whole media, and no one knows how to stop it. No one knows how to stop this freight train, and we’re all witnessing it right now. The deaths: 50 percent of them occurred within 48 hours of the shot, 80 percent occur within a week.” [One estimate is that roughly 150,000 people died from the jab in the U.S., though this remains unconfirmed – but here is the report.

He notes that there have thus far been 5,000 cases of myocarditis: “The vaccine is not safe for children and should not be mandated.” This is true: children have a 99.997% recovery rate from Covid-19 but an 86% adverse reaction rate to the jab (FDA clinical trials of Pfizer jab for young people), yet it’s being pushed on them anyway. See my detailed article on this. This issue alone should put the whole program on pause until the real truth can be determined. The danger of allowing medicine to be affected by pharmaceutical profits and by politics is that it can — and has — led to ethical abuses, because the health and well-being of the patients are abandoned for other motives.

Dr. McCullough points out that the vaccines have had zero effect on the pandemic curve, and that once a vaccine falls below 50% protection and can’t last a year, it is not a viable product on the commercial market. Essentially, it has failed as a commercial product. Moreover, it has led to ADE (antibody-dependent enhancement) or ‘leaky vaccine’ syndrome, which is what caused the so-called Delta variant. In other words, its continued use has led to new, worse variants. This idea, despite having advocates among many scientists such as vaccinologist Robert Malone and biologist Luc Montagnier, has been dismissed as unverified.

And yet it is proven by the example of Israel, a country that was highly ‘vaccinated’ but still had a high incidence of the Delta variant, despite that.

There have been scientific reports that discussed it, e.g,
(1) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32908214/;
(2) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7943455/;
(3) https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(21)00392-3/fulltext

There has also been a lot of claims by pundits that ADE was not happening (you can find many online). This is a good article in favour of the view that it is happening, citing scientific studies and putting it in an educated layman’s terms that I found helpful.

This is also a piece on ADE, from Malone, whose expertise and integrity I trust over all the physicians who have betrayed their Hippocratic oath by endorsing mRNA spike protein injections while knowing that it can produce a cytotoxin that travels through the body doing damage and killing some people.

Scapegoating the unvaccinated, as the mainstream media, are doing, ignores the fact that the spread of the disease is due in part to the ‘vaccines’ themselves. It’s also just wrong to dehumanize a whole group of people, which is what’s happening now. It always leads to a bad end. And in any case, it’s unjustified. See this report.

It reminds me a lot of how the early Christians were blamed by Nero for torching Rome (see my article on this comparison. This is a more scholarly piece worth reading on the scapegoating of the unvaccinated and how it relates to the social psychology of mobs, as outlined by the seminal thinker Rene Girard.

I use quotation marks around ‘vaccine’ because it’s not a real vaccine. It was only called that, deliberately, in order to sell the public on an experimental drug by making it seem familiar, and to persuade the public that any opposition to it was from “anti-vaxxers” — even though that’s not the case: most of the opposition from the public is from those who prefer medical freedom and privacy and oppose medical tyranny. The CDC actually changed the definition of vaccine for this purpose, from a drug that confers immunity to a drug that only contributes to it — because as we now know, it does not confer immunity.

And this begs the question: then why take it, especially inasmuch as it has the risk of adverse events? The short answer is that for people over age 70, it will mitigate Covid-19 if they catch it – meaning that for the great majority, it will lessen their chances of dying. I do not contest that. That seems to be its one benefit. However, the long-term risks are still unknown and it’s highly unusual to start using a drug that has not gone through all clinical trials and to also approve a drug that has gone through them and resulted in such a high degree of adverse events. The fact that 86% of adverse events were found in children from the trials should be enough to advise against their use in that age group — and yet it’s been approved from rollout in December by Health Canada. That’s simply astonishing. It should make thinking people stop and ask why such a thing could ever happen. How can Health Canada approve this for children or pregnant women? The disregard for human health by state physicians is criminal.

Many tens of thousands of physicians, health care professionals, and scientists know the truth but have chosen to be silent for the sake of their careers and reputations because they are up against a huge political machine with billions of dollars behind it. Eventually, when the coast is clear, I predict they will all come out against it — much as physicians who were opponents of scientific racism and eugenics in the 20th century later came out when the smoke had cleared. Had they been a bit more courageous at the time, they could have helped stop atrocities. Sometimes all it takes is one, such as Frances Oldham Kelsey, a pharmacologist who helped stopped Thalidmoide in the U.S. Sometimes one is all it takes to do terrible damage too, such as Janet Woodcock, who approved both opioids use in the U.S. (which kills 50,000 per year) and more recently the use of the Covid ‘vaccines’ (which may have killed 3x that number thus far). Ironically, both Kelsey and Woodcock work for the FDA. This illustrates an important ethical point: it’s not the institution as much as the moral decision by the individual that matters.

Covid-19/SARS-CoV2 is a disease with 0.5 to 2.5 transmission rate (RO), which is for example much lower than measles, which is 18 RO; and it’s a disease with a recovery rate between 94% and 99.997% (CDC numbers)- which is fairly high. It affects mainly older people with pre-existing co-morbidities, such as obesity. It has almost no effect on younger people, statistically. And yet the ‘vaccine’ is being pushed on all age groups now, through a reckless and massive propaganda campaign in all industrialized nations. It has created 40 new billionaires. It and the lockdowns have changed the world economy, shifting massive wealth and power to a few pharmaceutical corporations, to Amazon, Wal-Mart, and other huge corporations, contributing to the ‘growing gap’ of income inequality and to job losses on a massive scale. It has led to China’s imperial growth and power worldwide. None of these assertions can be reasonably disputed; there is substantial evidence for all of them.

Right now we’re being fed propaganda in the mainstream media and from a certain portion (but not the whole) of the medical industry. Yet they have the audacity to call skepticism of what’s going on “medical misinformation.” What’s happening now is nothing short of a crime against humanity on a massive scale – but it is happening through deception and institutional power, in the name of a greater good, so the evil inherent in it is not obvious to many. It has clearly benefited the Chinese Communist Party (which has used it for imperial expansion), and those who want more authoritarian global governance. It took centuries to build up a society that upholds human freedoms and egalitarianism (since the 17th century), but this was torn down in mere months under so-called “emergency orders.” Once gone, those freedoms will never return. The last time that happened in the West, due to the rise of state totalitarianism and it took a world war to regain the freedom that most of us take for granted – or did until 2020.

Billions have been spent in a massive propaganda campaign to push the jab, all for an otherwise unremarkable disease that seems to have been deliberately created in a lab in China with NIH funding in order to “enhance” its spread among humans through “gain-of-function” research. Despite its intended function, it killed just 4.4 million worldwide allegedly (or just 0.5 million worldwide if you subtract the inflated death counts, which ran as high as 88% in Italy, for example). If it was designed to harm us, then why the low death count? I suspect it’s because its real purpose is not mass death but to advance the psychological operation (psyop) that past ideological subversion efforts were designed to achieve: global authoritarianism. It’s already doing that by conditioning us to accept a two-tiered society that dehumanizes a sizeable minority (the unvaccinated), similar to the Chinese social credit system. A vaccine passport is a slippery slope to total state control of all our lives. Anyone who studies history would know men have always sought absolute power by any means necessary. Why is it so hard to believe that another attempt would be made now that the means for global control through technocracy is available?

What’s also fascinating to me is how past ideological subversion efforts actually helped this attempt by effectively neutralizing tens of millions of potential opponents to the plan, and even turning many of them into advocates for it by creating the misimpression that “Trump voters” are against it. Anything Trump voters are for, they’re reflexively against — never mind the irony that Trump himself is for the vaccine and helped finance its spread (foolishly in my opinion). This neutrality and even complicity in a massive medical atrocity is the phenomenon of what’s been called “the silence of the professors.”

I would call it the silence (and complicity) of the Left as a whole. Without their help, this atrocity would not receive such widespread support. I find it tragically funny that millennials SJWs (social justice warriors) are disingenuously talking about medical safety, which they care nothing about, in order to advance what they believe will bring about a ‘progressive’ society. The CCP call these progressives the pejorative term ‘baizuo’ (白左) similar to Stalin’s contempt for social democrats. Many Leftists such as Trudeau are unwittingly helping world domination by the CCP that may well eliminate them.

There is a kind of institutional momentum that’s happened where people are afraid to say no to the jab, despite private reservations. It has been attributed to a mass hysteria created in the mainstream media (see this), every day sending out huge headlines meant to scare people into submission over a disease that hardly warrants it.

A kind of cognitive dissonance has been created now in which people inflate the number of dead in their minds to match the level of fear they feel. If you ask the person on the street how many died, they will say 30 or more million. It was actually 4.4 million (and again, that’s not taking into account the fact that numbers of the dead are known to be inflated, and not taking into account the co-morbidities).

Now several countries have given up the hysteria and just said we’ll live with Covid and drop restrictions (e.g., Denmark, UK). Yet the success of Covid-19 to scare billions into submitting was so successful, you can expect another disease will come along soon. It’s inevitable and has already been predicted. Our hope to survive what it brings is to see through the deception happening right now and oppose it and put the perpetrators are on trial for crimes against humanity. That’s why I have a blog against medical tyranny.

It may be the most important political fight in the history of our species because if we lose it, we are destined for a truly dystopian future. Nor do I believe it will even benefit animals or the environment because the people doing this care for neither; scientism and medical authoritarianism and technocracy view nature entirely instrumentally. They also view human beings the same way and are willing to sacrifice them for some perceived ‘greater good’ through the use of instrumental reason posing as utilitarianism.

An example of this thinking was evident in Unit 731 by the Japanese military, in which local Chinese populations were used in horrid medical experiments. After the war, those kinds of experiments (also done by the Nazis) were what led to the Nuremberg Code. Yet that Code – as well as the Hippocratic Oath and the other principles of medical ethics — have been violated in the last two years, brazenly.

I believe in science and medicine as valid and important endeavours which have done much for humanity and our understanding of the world — but not when it’s been subverted for power and profit. I first grew to be skeptical of scientism, a few years ago, when I saw how it routinely sanctioned terrible animal cruelty needlessly by continuing to do experiments on them that violated the ‘three Rs’ (replacement, reduction, refinement) especially when non-animal methods could work as well or better in many cases. It was predicated on speciesism and utilitarianism.

The current push in medicine is also utilitarian: willing to sacrifice thousands of people who die from adverse events, supposedly for the sake of billions. There is a moral callousness demonstrated by those pushing the vaccine so relentlessly. The real motive, I believe, is not public health — which the case of the children should make evident. The real motives are financial and political. That fact will emerge in time, despite the massive propaganda campaign to the contrary.

Below are some more resources for “those who have ears to hear.” I sent everything below this line to a man who I thought was open-minded because he has had the benefit of higher education. I was mistaken. He was close-minded and lazy, dismissing all of it without having bothered to read it. I hope you the reader will be more open-minded and use this as a building block for open inquiry.

  1. Open letter to B.C. Premier and Health ministers, from health professionals
  2. The Silence of the Professors (on issues they should be addressing)
  3. Statement by Canadian ethics professor who refuses experimental vaccine on the grounds of freedom of medical choice, informed consent, and bodily autonomy.

NB – there was a call for medical freedom of choice against mandates in universities that I sent you earlier, along the same lines, but the statement by the professor, Juli Ponesse, is more visceral and powerful since it is a personal stand.

  1. A Letter to Public Health Officers (from 12 Canadian scholars) This is powerfully worded and well-referenced.
  2. Letter from 57 doctors, urging an end to ‘vaccines’ – from 4 months ago but still relevant.
  3. Article on conscience. “A crisis has now darkened Western democracies just as surely as long-benighted dictatorships. Wherein does it lie? In the disdain with which its proud technocrats dismiss conscience.”

Why is this Statistics Canada report of so many “lockdown deaths” acceptable to people? Why do we turn a blind eye to preventable ‘lockdown deaths’? It says that four times as many people under 65 years old died from lockdowns as from Covid-19. A lockdown death is from suicide, overdose, or lack of access to medical care.

How can people accept that as okay?

  1. An article on how the federal government is demonizing and scapegoating Canadians unjustly and why that’s wrong (it’s by one of the signatories of the letter above). The Prime Minister engaged in hateful rhetoric on the campaign trail and is pushing ahead with a segregated society.
  2. Why so many vaccinated people are getting sick? Why are they still promoting the ‘vaccine’ if it’s causing the 4th wave?! And why incorrectly blame the unvaccinated for that? See this article. NB – ADE would explain why Israel, which has a high vaccination rate is also experiencing a “fourth wave.” This is a shorter adaptation of the same idea if you prefer.
  3. ADE is known by all vaccinologists, including Robert Malone.

Question: Why was the lockdown model ever followed at all? We now know from epidemiological reports that the costs outweigh the benefits. See this Could it be that it had political value for authoritarians, far more than any public health benefit, and the health care industry submitted for fear of losing their jobs? That’s plausible because many who did speak out this draconian measure lost their jobs.

Here are photos from a recent protest in Halifax by nurses who object to vaccine mandates on my blog. Not all health professionals are in agreement with what’s happening now – we just don’t hear about them in the media. And why is that? It could be that the media is paid by the government to promote a certain position, i.e., promoting fear.

Further thoughts / questions:

I accept your point that the disease kills people (including someone you knew, which I’m sorry for) and some people might be taking advantage of the situation (after Naomi Klein’s “shock doctrine” thesis) — but even if so, do you see that some lines have been crossed that should not have been crossed (e.g., mandating vaccines)?

For example, how can it be right to destroy people’s livelihoods and violate their inalienable rights for a disease with a 94 to 99% recovery rate, and then force people to take an experimental drug or lose their jobs? How can it be right to compel a university student who has a 99.997% recovery rate to take it when it’s known that adverse effects are highest among male teens?

How is it right to violate human rights and create a segregated society in which one group of it is scapegoated by imposing vaccine passports and mandates? How is right to suppress low-cost treatments that work in favour of expensive, experimental drugs that don’t provide immunity – drugs that give Big Pharma huge profits and state actors absolute power over us?

Do Canadians really want a society in which the following are the norm: censorship (no freedom of speech, no academic freedom); suspension of Charter rights; statism and state media with only one approved message (the rest forbidden); dividing and demonizing portions of the population (the unvaccinated, those who protest the state); giving state-sanctioned ‘health’ apparatchiks absolute authority over our lives, and creating lockdown deaths and ruining small businesses and countless lives in the process?

We will never emerge from this as long as people continue to submit to it. It’s a slippery slope to more and more losses of freedom until nothing is left and we might as well be living in North Korea. If we accept the loss of bodily autonomy, where does it end?

Climate change issues

A question: do you believe this is a prelude to climate lockdowns and is necessary for that reason? Like you, I think that climate change is an important issue we need to address, by changing our fossil fuel consumption to renewable energy, etc — but is this really the way to do it, by creating an authoritarian society like China’s? How far do we go? Are there any limits? Would those in power respect them even if there were I once ran into a neo-Nazi who told me he was an environmentalist and his solution was to kill most people. Yes, that’s more sustainable, but it’s also evil.

Bill Gates’s focus is climate mitigation through the lens of technological optimism — but what kind of society will this be if its new ruling class cares nothing for mitigating climate change and has simply done all this to impose tyranny for no good reason at all (just their own power and wealth)? Gates may care about zero emissions by 2050 — but if so, at what cost? Do the ends justify the means, if the means turn out to be demonstrably evil? Are we that naive to believe that it won’t go to that bad place if we just allow technocrats to determine our lives and future?

How do progressives know that Canada won’t end up being controlled by China and their model of mass industrialization imposed here, with total disregard for the environment? There are reports they are planning world domination. Canada will be their country in the not too distant future.

I would submit that we don’t know and it’s a risk some progressives are naively taking, blindly hoping for the best, being caught up in the euphoria of being part of world-changing events. But when absolute power is to be had, the Stalins and Maos rise to the top and they push the well-meaning types aside. Eventually, everyone is either robbed of freedom or life.

Progressives are silent as all this is going on, perhaps believing it will lead to a better society: eco-friendly democratic socialism like Scandinavia. This is why they did not respond to the Statement of Non-Compliance (# 3 above). But if they can take away your bodily autonomy, what else can they take away? It’s a slippery slope to the worst sort of governance.

It reminds me of dystopian post-apocalyptic films like THX-1138 and Logan’s Run. They managed to have environmentally sustainable societies and survive as a species, but at the cost of their humanity. They became ultra-authoritarian, killing citizens routinely, controlled by computers. Both films are about the necessity of independent thought and human freedom and personal conscience in response to repressive societies.

Shouldn’t progressive be speaking out against the injustices that are occurring now and taking a stand against this massive seizure of power away from ordinary people and into the hands of Big Pharma and state actors? Universities in Germany and Russia fell to totalitarian ideologies within about 10 years. I see the same thing happening now, and a “silence of professors” in response to it (as the article below notes). People who came here from Eastern Europe are now telling us that this is how their societies fell, by degrees into despotism.

Thus far I have been attributing the silence of good people to naïve political idealism — but what if there is a simpler reason for it? Fear breeding complicity. Fear of being scapegoated, as many already have been. As Voltaire said, “If you want to know who rules over you, just look for who you are not allowed to criticize.” Better to say nothing and keep one’s job than endanger it for nothing, as the thinking goes — which is precisely why German universities and churches fell into line. Medical authority was also (mis)used at that time to bolster the new regime.

Call it medical collectivism: the nation seen as a single body, the health of which has to be protected by eliminating those who are seen as potentially diseased. Individual rights don’t exist. Medical science in Germany roughly a 85 years ago, was given absolute authority to meet its objectives, at the expense of individuals (e.g., “life unworthy of life”). The vicious rhetoric against the unvaccinated has not got that far (yet), but it could. The dehumanizing rhetoric has begun – the calls for the unvaccinated to die or be deprived of medical treatment, and even provocatively calling them “rats” and “vermin” online. The media has whipped people into a frenzy of irrational hate. A few may even relish being part of that new kind of society, as it gives them total power over others.

Lastly, in terms of medicine itself, there’s a book called The Expressiveness of the Body. From it, I learned that there is more than one medical paradigm possible. Today we have both allopathic and naturopathic medicine. Both have successes and failures. I’d argue both are of value. But what we are witnessing now is an abuse of allopathic medicine, its co-option or appropriation for bad purposes, and turning it into blind obedience to science, into scientism.

We should never suspend our judgment and believe that medical science can replace ethics or common sense. Recall the Milgram experiment, where test subjects were so obedient to men in lab coats that they deliberately harmed actors (thinking they were the test subjects). Authorities are worried about “medical misinformation” but the more they engage in censorship, the more they drive people to the censored materials. And some are from legitimate physicians and some are not. Now we have to discern for ourselves what is good or bad medicine or good or bad journalism because there are no standards anymore. Censorship just breeds distrust. So does scientism, which is profoundly unscientific.

Being told to “trust the science” — as though there is scientific consensus on this issue (there isn’t) — just makes me look into dissenting views. I find there are thousands of health professionals who do not agree with the state-endorsed view, and some are brave enough to express it (most are not, and need to protect their jobs). If this were really about disease control, why wouldn’t Ivermectin be used more widely, as it is in poorer countries?

Malone and other scientists fear that the censorship of unorthodox scientific views and imposition of a single scientific perspective (one that accords with state power) is creating widespread public distrust in medical authority – and they’re right. See this.

I don’t believe anything coming out of the mouth of the health officials in Canada anymore. They’re putting public health at risk with lockdowns and a drug that causes variants through ADE and examples like Israel prove it. It’s willfully irresponsible It’s being done for power. And the media are assisting them. It’s frightening. It’s the prelude to a much worse society.

Ultimately, this is really an issue of personal conscience. Each person must decide for him or herself what the limit is. It reminds me of the story of Archbishop Oscar Romero, who denied that injustices were occurring until he could no longer ignore them and spoke out, making himself an enemy of some evil men – and eventually they killed him.

Perhaps in the future you and other persons of conscience will be faced with the same dilemma that Fr. Romero was, as things get worse (though hopefully with a better outcome!) I think this is a good time to speak up, as a person of conscience against some of the practices that are obviously wrong (e.g., vaccine mandates).

And if after reading these documents you don’t agree, can you tell me why? I just want to understand this. Why are people of good conscience not speaking up as this is occurring?

Published by

Ungekrzte

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity ... the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This immaturity is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the [European] Enlightenment. "Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet [or vaccine], and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind ... should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts. "Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the immaturity which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas [e.g., Leftist ideology, identity politics] these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting immaturity. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from immaturity by cultivating their own minds." - Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment"

One thought on “Good speech by an epidemiologist critical of the ‘vaccine’ for being a toxin with unknown long-term effects and “unsafe for human use.””

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s