Funeral Director Says 95% Of Clients Were Vaxxt And Died Within 2 Weeks Of Being Vaxxt

originally posted by: igloo

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowedAnything "safe and effective" needs no pandering as it speaks for itself with 100 percent results. But that has not been observed, only "peddled".

Aspirin kills ~3000 people per year.

removed response myself. Just saw DTOM's message and my post wasn't on topic.

Were you being a meanie head to me?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

If I may, I'd like to interject a question in the direction of those who
support the covid vaccination. Do you support it with the belief that
those pushing it so hard are actually doing so out of their concern for
the health and welfare of humanity?

Simple question right?

a reply to: Saloon

Not to derail, that'd be like saying they actually care about black people, and all the rest. Its a pawn game. And aint none of us are the Knight or the Rook. Not to them. We're all means to their ends....

a reply to: godsovein

Not to derail, that'd be like saying they actually care about black people, and all the rest. Its a pawn game. And aint none of us are the Knight or the Rook. Not to them. We're all means to their ends....

I hope I didn't pose a thread killer?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0



How would they know the right amount of spike protein to put in a shot unless they tried it out, hence the hot batches? Too bad if you got one, it would be better for them if the dose was staggard so it was not too obvious. If it gets in the cells and replicates, it must take longer with a small dose of spike and would vary depending on the individual, so a die-off didn't occur all at once. With any luck, some people would just shrug it off like any foreign invader. I think the average death rate is being fudged, as some are putting it way up and others are saying around ten to fifteen percent. Either way, the death rates should have decreased after the safe and effective treatment.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowedAnything "safe and effective" needs no pandering as it speaks for itself with 100 percent results. But that has not been observed, only "peddled".

Aspirin kills ~3000 people per year.

So you finally get it. Glad to see it.

By the way, I never take aspirin and have never recommended it. Same with the phony Covid19 products that turned out to be worthless, except for their deadliness which government seems to admire and still promote the use of.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

How could a funeral director know of the vaccinated status of the deceased?

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: igloo

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowedAnything "safe and effective" needs no pandering as it speaks for itself with 100 percent results. But that has not been observed, only "peddled".

Aspirin kills ~3000 people per year.

removed response myself. Just saw DTOM's message and my post wasn't on topic.

Were you being a meanie head to me?

Of course.

originally posted by: Saloon
a reply to: godsovein

Not to derail, that'd be like saying they actually care about black people, and all the rest. Its a pawn game. And aint none of us are the Knight or the Rook. Not to them. We're all means to their ends....

I hope I didn't pose a thread killer?

It's a good question.

Sorry, it took me a while to respond. She was checked out and cleared by a cardiologist.

It's most likely her angina.

a reply to: MykeNukem

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: v1rtu0s0



How would they know the right amount of spike protein to put in a shot unless they tried it out, hence the hot batches? Too bad if you got one, it would be better for them if the dose was staggard so it was not too obvious. If it gets in the cells and replicates, it must take longer with a small dose of spike and would vary depending on the individual, so a die-off didn't occur all at once. With any luck, some people would just shrug it off like any foreign invader. I think the average death rate is being fudged, as some are putting it way up and others are saying around ten to fifteen percent. Either way, the death rates should have decreased after the safe and effective treatment.

It's the same protein as covid itself, so we'd expect to see the same problems in the unvaxxed around the same time.

The doesage is based on previous vaxxes, such as the flu shot.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: The2Billies

Sorry to hear that.

Just not my experience or that of anyone else I know or work with. And that's a lot of folk.

Stay safe.

Wasn't my experience or that of my many Sr Cit friends. We were all shocked. We have all now vowed never to take another RNA vax ever. My friend has made it a mission to inform everyone she knows what happened to her sister and to warn them about getting any more boosters. Mainly because her sisters doctors are documenting everything that plan to submit their findings to the CDC and FDA; I think with the way the current administration is going, this is dangerous for them and they may be censured for doing this since other doctors have been. So they are risking their livelihoods to make this report to the CDC and FDA, that is what makes my friend and her friends know this was real and the risk is real of boosters.

I was even enrolled in a RSV new vaccine trial program since my grandchild benefited from the traditional RSV vaccine for children. I called before going in to ask, is this a traditional style new vaccine for adults or an RNA new vaccine. They said RNA and I said, sorry I won't participate after my friends sister nearly died from total organ failure due to the RNA covid 3rd booster.

originally posted by: Saloon
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

If I may, I'd like to interject a question in the direction of those who
support the covid vaccination. Do you support it with the belief that
those pushing it so hard are actually doing so out of their concern for
the health and welfare of humanity?

Simple question right?

If there's one thing that we know about liberals it's that they have a near obsessive concern for other people's "welfare".

Why do you find it so hard to believe that a person who wants to put trigger warning on everything, and to censor everything - because being exposed to an idea or a concept might cause harm - doesn't have similar beliefs when it comes to illnesses?

You're doing the equivalent of asking me if I think that vegans sincerely believe that mouse traps are bad.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Follow up question for you is why do you equate " Those who support
the vaccine" immediately to liberals? Tell me it wasn't just so you
could comment using a stereotypical liberal persona as you perceive
it to be. The question was very simple as it was written.

So this isn't even relevant.

Why do you find it so hard to believe that a person who wants to put trigger warning on everything, and to censor everything - because being exposed to an idea or a concept might cause harm - doesn't have similar beliefs when it comes to illnesses?

But I'll answer just the same. I don't find that hard to believe at all.

This isn't anything.

You're doing the equivalent of asking me if I think that vegans sincerely believe that mouse traps are bad.

What's hard to believe is your attempt to make it look like you answered the question.

So liberal or not even more simplified. Do you support the vaccine with the
belief that those pushing it so hard ( Congress, Bureaucrats Politicians) are
actually doing so out of their concern for the health and welfare of humanity?
Put another way.
Do you ever think there may be the slightest possibility that most of the a for
mentioned have large investments in the vaccine?

If you can't answer it correctly now I'll just move on.

a reply to: Saloon

why do you equate " Those who support the vaccine" immediately to liberals?

It makes sense in the context of the comment that I was replying to.

What's hard to believe is your attempt to make it look like you answered the question.

The answer was in my original post, which you conveniently didn't quote. Little oversight there, huh?

Do you ever think there may be the slightest possibility that most of the a for mentioned have large investments in the accine?

For the vast majority of people pushing the vax, absolutely 100 percent not. Most have no financial stake in the vax at all.

Sure, one or two may see some gains in terms of stocks and share going up in value, but the vast majority, no. They're doing it because they honestly believe that vaxxing people is the right answer.

They support top down answers and big government, and vaxxing is a pretty typical top down big government solution to something like this. It's perfectly in character.

These are many of the same people who want to solve obesity by restricting access to certain foods and by controlling ingredients, and to cut gun crime by limiting access to guns rather than reducing crime.

a reply to: Saloon

why do you equate " Those who support the vaccine" immediately to liberals?

It makes sense in the context of the comment that I was replying to.

What's hard to believe is your attempt to make it look like you answered the question.

The answer was in my original post, which you conveniently didn't quote. Little oversight there, huh?

Do you ever think there may be the slightest possibility that most of the a for mentioned have large investments in the accine?

For the vast majority of people pushing the vax, absolutely 100 percent not. Most have no financial stake in the vax at all.

Sure, one or two may see some gains in terms of stocks and share going up in value, but the vast majority, no. They're doing it because they honestly believe that vaxxing people is the right answer.

They support top down answers and big government, and vaxxing is a pretty typical top down big government solution to something like this. It's perfectly in character.

These are many of the same people who want to solve obesity by restricting access to certain foods and by controlling ingredients, and to cut gun crime by limiting access to guns rather than reducing crime.

originally posted by: nugget1
Some people just can't admit they failed to see the obvious.

Bingo.

It would help them save face if they could see someone from mainstream news admit he or she has been fooled and wants to change direction.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Did you know the CDC accepted 3.4 million dollars from Pfizer?

One million from Merck & Co. Just a few.

And here is their disclaimer

"“CDC, our planners, content experts, and their spouses/partners wish to disclose they have no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products, suppliers of commercial services, or commercial supporters. Planners have reviewed content to ensure there is no bias. CDC does not accept commercial support.”

How can you support such blatant in your face dishonesty?

I bet you refuse to even acknowledge that this is perfectly good reason
not trust these bastards. Their still busy trying to pin something on Trump
when the CDC should be so clean you self admitted liberal.

a reply to: Saloon

Did you know the CDC accepted 3.4 million dollars from Pfizer?

Of course, you have a source for this?

you self admitted liberal

Link, please.

a reply to: Saloon

Just wondering, and not that I am one, but what is so wrong with being liberal?