THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Anything on the news and elsewhere in the media with evidence of digital manipulation, bogus story-lines and propaganda
sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Sun Nov 15, 2020 6:48 am

.


THE VACCINATION DECEIT

The notion of ‘vaccination’ is anathema to our natural biological processes.
Nature does not (or cannot) destroy itself otherwise we would not be here in the first place as it would destroy itself.
Nature is not an ‘entity’, it is how we came to be whatever we might conclude, pretend or speculate otherwise.
The notion of preventing ‘dis-eases’ which are purely the displacement or disregard of natural processes and of maintaining a terrain that satisfies our longevity within Nature, is paramount to our survival within Nature.
Whatever ‘Nature’ is, we are born and aware in some way of it.
Peter K. Sharpen


However, there are some that believe that Nature somehow produces entities which are not good for us and need, in some way, to be eradicated.
Hence the nature of ‘germs’/‘viruses’ which, unaccountably small-enough (and thus not able to be observed directly or verified) are supposed to be responsible for our own irresponsibility (however determined by others than ourselves) and make us ILL!

We therefore must take the responsibility of our own health (i.e. terrain) (if we are allowed to) and safely place it upon influences outside ourselves and not rely, especially from the unidentified ‘germs’, ‘viruses’ and such-like and the perpetrators of those who claim that they exist without independent investigation by others.

Let us begin…

Definitions are a mine (as in explosive device) of discontent with only a way down to unintelligible reason. P.K. Sharpen

So we are led down the path to obtain a definition of ‘vaccination’.

According to: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine

Vaccine: any preparation used as a preventive inoculation to confer immunity against a specific disease, usually employing an innocuous form of the disease agent, as killed or weakened bacteria or viruses, to stimulate antibody production.

Wow!

We must immediately ask certain pertinent questions regarding this particular definition of the italicised words.

-preparation (used as a noun) of what, exactly?
-inoculation (a verb): the stabbing of individuals via a device to penetrate the biological body of a flora or fauna.
-immunity (noun): Question: Free from what, exactly?)
-innocuous form of the disease agent (What is 'innocuous'?)
-killed (!) how? or weakened (how?) bacteria or viruses (Do 'bacteria' or 'viruses' actually exist as entities we can cope with?)
-antibody (?) What exactly is that?

Unless these definitions, which would also require definitions can be safely held as real or actual, what exactly are we talking about?
So ‘vaccination/inoculation’ is supposed to counter the effect of ‘germs’, ‘viruses’, ‘bacteria’, none of which can be adequately observed to render them entities which can ‘harm’ a biological process either in the shape of flora or fauna, in any shape or being.
Without precise knowledge of these alleged entities, we are to assume that they can be countered by the injection (or oral supplementation) of substances which cannot be measured for their effects and their subsequent interference with life processes.
What I have been endeavouring to discover is what are the repercussions of ‘vaccination’, especially in regard to the real-life problems of those flora and fauna that have been damaged, in some way by these so-called ‘vaccinations’.
My main thrust is with the compromisation of individual humans, especially young bodies less likely to be able to cope with whatever the injected material might contain.
As a researcher and teacher of ‘students with disabilities’ as these dear souls are termed, I was looking into the proliferation of so-called ‘Special’ schools for the education of these children.
The information is dearth on the Internet upon this issue, so I beg if anyone can find any material on this matter, I would be grateful, since my ‘theory’ needs accurate substance (as they all should, of course).

To begin:

Here is an article from Guardian Newspaper (U.K.) (2018?)

Quote:

‘Special needs pupils being failed by system 'on verge of crisis'
This article is more than 2 years old.

‘Rising demand puts councils in England at risk of bankruptcy, Guardian investigation reveals.

Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are being failed by a system “on the verge of crisis” as demand for specialist support soars and threatens to bankrupt local authorities, a Guardian investigation has revealed.’

Source:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... rge-crisis

*********************************************
My research, after much looking for further information, found the following .pdf below:

Warning! It is a very large book but one should read at least the first few pages which describe how it may be navigated (if interested).

http://www.chiropractic.org/wp-content/ ... 15-19.pdf
*****************************************

This is partly why I am so passionately dedicated to exposing the deceit of 'germs', 'viruses', ‘bacteria’ and especially with my 25-odd years working with students with 'disabilities'.
It is all very well poo-pooing these issues as many people do because these nonsenses are so entrenched in the 'common' (no disrespect intended but the opposite) mind. I beg a little indulgence if you will.

I will give you a little back-ground because what I am saying is 'from a horse's mouth’.

When I graduated as a mature student (at 32), I was first relegated to becoming a Supply Teacher, which means that I was not ‘permanent’ until I acquired a full-time teacher position. I was qualified as an English/Art teacher. I spent nearly two years at various schools before being sent to a ‘Special’ school at Chadwell Heath, Essex (U.K.).
I immediately took to the work and the teacher for whom I was standing in, decided to work elsewhere (another ‘Special’ school just up the road).
The headmaster at the time asked me if I would like to stay full-time and I took the opportunity and spent over six years there before I decided to go to Australia for the second time. I had also taken a two-year successful night-school qualification in Special Education in the meantime and having succeeded in a rise in rank and for two years voted a teacher-governor.
It was evident before I left that the school was expanding and as far as I can see from recent aerial photographs, expanded considerably even before I left.
When I returned to Western Australia (1989), I also managed to become involved with the local (Rockingham) Senior High-school as a substitute teacher which had a Special Education Unit, which comprised of two class-rooms located in different areas of the school. It was here that I continued my previous work in the U.K., especially with work-experience and practical subjects for over eight years before I was replaced (to great shock from all the teachers in the school) with a ‘permanent’ teacher given that the ‘system’ is different from that of the U.K.
During that time, I was also involved with a school in Malibu for severe learning difficulties which have to be seen and felt to be believed.
I was later (after two years elsewhere) re-instated at Rockingham when it became an Education Support Centre (it was much larger). I was there for many years but again supplanted by a ‘Permanent’ teacher. However, this teacher was not a ‘well’ lady and I continued for a long time there.
Since that time, I note that also, the preponderance of the building of new premises for those children afflicted by ‘learning difficulties’ has expanded enormously at Rockingham (as well as at Chadwell Heath) judging by aerial photographs of the site.
For other reasons, I returned to the U.K. but was by then near retirement and the rest is of no interest to this forum.

My thrust in this instance comprises of several interesting questions:

1. Does the rise in the proliferation of these ‘Special’ units have any relationship with the increase in ‘vaccinations’? The rate of vaccinations has increased to such an extent that here in France (at least), children are required to have 11 vaccinations (and more to come!) before they are allowed into a classroom!
2. Aside: When staff (without myself, as I have an aversion to being stabbed with anything) were invited to take the ‘flu’ jab invariably ended up with the ‘flu’ symptoms after the vaccination, why was that?
3. I ask: Does the increase in the number of vaccinations lead to an increase in the need for ‘Special Education’ to cater for those who cannot reject the material (whatever it is) and suffer damage to their natural bodily systems?
4. If so, why the proliferation of ‘Special’ Units to attempt to ‘educate’ them?
Where is there any irrefutable independent evidence that injecting un-natural fluids into a living creature is of any benefit, whatever the reason (?) to do so?

Conclusion

Please ask:

1. If indeed there are ‘germs’ or ‘viruses’, ‘bacteria’ where is the irrefutable evidence that they exist from independent studies which we can understand as mere mortals?
2. Where is the irrefutable evidence that whatever is that a ‘vaccine’ is capable of negating the effect of the alleged ‘germ or ’viruses’, bacteria’ should they exist?
3. If these fiends (‘germs’, ‘viruses’, ‘bacteria’) do not exist without this irrefutable evidence, then vaccination is of no use but absolutely dangerous to any bio-form.

Given the notion of ‘mandatory’ vaccination (if it actually feasible to enforce it on the whole planet!) is doing the rounds, it would be pertinent to consider the notion of such things as:
a. Assault with a deadly (or potentially deadly) weapon (as in stabbing).
b. Grievous bodily harm.
c. Invasion of privacy.

One is welcome to add to this list.

Anyway,
Stay well.
Sharpstuff

pov603
Member
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by pov603 » Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:25 am

Following on from your article sharpstuff, and wIth the impending possibility of forced/ coerced mandatory vaccination I had come across a webcast where the Doctor was explaining that because of “war crimes” in the 2nd WW, enforced medical procedures were “banned” under international law.
I will try and find link.
In the meantime:
In 1975, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in O'Connor v. Donaldson that involuntary hospitalization and/or treatment violates an individual's civil rights. The individual must be exhibiting behavior that is a danger to themselves or others and a court order must be received for more than a short (e.g. 72-hour) detention. The treatment must take place in the least restrictive setting possible. This ruling has since been watered down through jurisprudence in some respects and strengthened in other respects. Long term "warehousing", through de-institutionalization, declined in the following years, though the number of people receiving involuntary treatment has increased more recently.[when?] The statutes vary somewhat from state to state.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_treatment

nokidding
Member
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:30 am

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by nokidding » Mon Nov 16, 2020 5:41 am

Thank you for the interesting post. I have seen that low paid casual work looking after young adult severely autistic people has become common now (in WA). In 1992 when I did post graduate teacher training (junior school, UK) autism was not even mentioned once. I had problems in teaching practice with a boy who could not remain in his seat and I got into trouble for it. In fact I walked out in disgust after they surprised me with a kangaroo court (and never went back). Children had Special Needs, but there was no concept of autism and I was not aware of special schools, there were special needs teachers who came in and taught them one to one. One of the obvious questions often asked is if Autism is genetic, where are all the old people with it?

The question that interests me is the low end of the spectrum. We are now familiar with mid range Autism. Severe Autism is mostly out of sight in institutions and unfortunate family homes.

However I suspect that there are many many more who have been 'mildly' damaged such that their relationships are difficult or non-existent. This effects their school life, work life and love life. It is never identified as such. No one wants to say their children are mildly damaged people, not least to their own children.

The idea is now that we are all on the autism spectrum. Autism is normal. Or it is upbringing of course. Kids and society like to blame the parents. But we know that you can have an atrocious upbringing and be a normal person. Maybe with problems, we all have them, but not autism which is specifically an inability to relate.

The lockdown regime seems almost to create an autistic environment, one where relationship is minimised.

Not much help I know but I share your concern. I expect you have read all the books I have on virology and vaccines. The impression you get is you can mess about with cellular generation, but they do not know what they are doing, and as usual the science has been hijacked.

What we do to animals in all of this needs to be at the forefront, I am not an activist or even a strict vegetarian but I am appalled and sickened by the medical research industry. This links directly to being unable to see what is being done to children and the adults they become.

I had TB at age 15 / 16 and was cured so I cannot completely take up the position on germs. Nor even on social distancing, I got it next door, perhaps the English doorstep was always a way of avoiding too intimate contact. Nobody who had an STD would question germ transition. Not all disease is the same...my sister had polio in the 1950s, she had her tonsils out and the vaccination which maybe caused it...

I also got badly sick after a flu injection and never had another. I have never been ill since. It was about 5 years ago, before that I was down with flu several times a year. Maybe it was airplanes etc and school aged kids at home but what then is the flu jab for if not to protect you from that?

nokidding

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:47 pm

I am citing Polio here as representative of virtually all (if not all) so-called 'diseases', as they come under the same banner.

Here is one take on polio:

https://holisticlifemama.com/2016/01/31 ... out-polio/

Video

https://holisticlifemama.com/2016/01/31 ... out-polio/

(<8 mins.)

I know this lady mentions viruses and I am not au fait with that and if you listen, it is pretty obvious that they are not required to explain everything given whatever was in the injection.

She does say that monkey cells are used in the mix. Now come on! Monkey cells are not human cells. On their own, they would not be injected into people because they are not conducive to human cells. The very notion is, in my view at least, appalling.

Watching the video seems to me to represent a similar procedure to what is presently happening. What do they say: There is nothing new in the Universe...

As far as 'diseases' are concerned, I append a short video I made about 6 years ago.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qZgQkppoz8

Be safe and well.
Sharpstuff

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7031
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by simonshack » Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:41 am

*

My goodness, dear Sharpstuff!

I vaguely remember wiewing that text-video of yours some years ago and, in all honesty, didn't make much / or grasp much of it at the time...

Today though, I can fully appreciate the profound wisdom - and almost "prophetic" nature of its contents. The terrain, the terrain!

patrix
Member
Posts: 634
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by patrix » Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:26 am

Indeed. I have now realized that todays medicine is stuck in a completely false paradigm and that the correct one is the one you describe Sharpstuff. Disease is the manifestation of our bodies attempts to heal itself.

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:24 am

Why vaccines 'work'

Firstly, invent a 'virus' or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

Secondly, invent a 'test' for the invented 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

Thirdly, apply as many tests as possible, (having convinced the 'masses', in their ignorance of their efficacy) who will, under a fake threat of these invisible enemies, willingly, or unwillingly, take them.

Since the so-called 'tests' do not work (i.e. cannot 'work') because there is no 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' they can give only false positives.

(The notion of a 'negative' response is written into the narrative for the sake of a possible response to add flavour to the notion that the 'tests' work in detecting a possible 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' in the first place in the main).

Therefore, the more tests, the more positives.

The 'negatives' go home 'knowing' they do (might) not have the 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' (yet) and are therefore safe and sound so long as they 'stick by the rules' (whatever they are).

The 'positives' go home (lock-down, incarceration, denounced as 'unclean' etc.) but still unsure, perhaps, of awaiting impending death or destruction from the fake 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

If they then give enough 'vaccines' they can stop testing. Thus by stopping the tests, there must be far less false positives.

Therefore, less people get the alleged 'disease' because they were 'vaccinated'.

Ergo, they can say that vaccines work!

Be well.
Sharpstuff

SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by SacredCowSlayer » Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:06 pm

sharpstuff wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:24 am
Why vaccines 'work'

Firstly, invent a 'virus' or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

Secondly, invent a 'test' for the invented 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

Thirdly, apply as many tests as possible, (having convinced the 'masses', in their ignorance of their efficacy) who will, under a fake threat of these invisible enemies, willingly, or unwillingly, take them.

Since the so-called 'tests' do not work (i.e. cannot 'work') because there is no 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' they can give only false positives.

(The notion of a 'negative' response is written into the narrative for the sake of a possible response to add flavour to the notion that the 'tests' work in detecting a possible 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' in the first place in the main).

Therefore, the more tests, the more positives.

The 'negatives' go home 'knowing' they do (might) not have the 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria' (yet) and are therefore safe and sound so long as they 'stick by the rules' (whatever they are).

The 'positives' go home (lock-down, incarceration, denounced as 'unclean' etc.) but still unsure, perhaps, of awaiting impending death or destruction from the fake 'virus or 'germ' or 'bacteria'.

If they then give enough 'vaccines' they can stop testing. Thus by stopping the tests, there must be far less false positives.

Therefore, less people get the alleged 'disease' because they were 'vaccinated'.

Ergo, they can say that vaccines work!

Be well.
Sharpstuff
Dear Sharpstuff,

You’ve nailed it once again my friend. That does appear to be the precise formula for the beginning of a declared “pandemic”—all the way through to the eventual “eradication” of it. And of course, the cycle self-affirms for the next go-around, whenever that may be.

As our member ICfreely has written on this forum, the “higher-ups” in the medical institutions have been known to simply change the diagnostic criteria (of the targeted “virus” or disease) soon after the release of a “vaccination”—such that nobody would “test positive” for it again. It’s merely a sick and twisted magic trick, and people will (sadly) continue to fall for it as these institutions continue to gain in strength.

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Sun Nov 22, 2020 11:31 am

The Mandatory Vaccination Trick

I was already working on a refusal to vaccinate form (and researching, as usual) and came upon this article, well worth a read.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/no_ ... mandatory/

However, I persisted with my own refusal form, which I append below. Whether it would have any effect is unknown.

1. Understand it
2. It would have any effect
3. However, it might give pause for thought.

This is a genuine concern, of course.

As usual, comments welcome.

******************************************************************

This is not paginated as I would like but I hope suffices.



REFUSAL FOR MANDATORY VACCINATION CERTIFICATE

Plea of refusal by the recipient:

I do not agree to be vaccinated according to my Right (given or otherwise) as a free person of Nature to have any substance injected or orally applied to my person by any means possible by an outside agency without my express and reasoned consent. My wishes are to be followed for all my family, especially children, pets or other living organisms.

Signed________________________Dated_________________

The following statement must be filled-in all sections
and must be signed and dated by the person/persons administering the vaccination and those responsible for that administration.


************************************************************

ATTESTATION BY VACCINATOR

According to the mandates of the Establishment for the implementation of this mandatory vaccine I affirm that I will be personally responsible for any adverse effects for which the subject and any others to whom he or she is responsible including family, livestock and flora of any kind.
Failure to conform to the wishes of the Plea by the respondent to the vaccine (mandatory of otherwise) will be entitled to punishment through Common Law for Common Assault, Assault and Battery, brandishing a weapon, Assault with a deadly or potentially deadly weapon or any other form of coercion.

Please fill in the following form (handwriting mandatory):

Date of writing:_______________________________

Reference: Mandatory Article No.:__________________________

Full name_______________________________
Qualifications (if any) ____________________________
Home Address____________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________

Full names of those responsible for applying mandatory measures such as vaccination.

Name_________________________________
Organisation____________________________
Qualifications (if any) and certified by independent professionals:
_____________________________________________________

Dated__________________________________

All or any others to be appended upon a separate sheet, Signed and dated to be attached.

Vaccinator:

I understand that I have read the initial Plea by the potential recipient of this vaccine and fully understand the implications.

Signature____________________________Date__________________

FURTHER

Statement/s from the person responsible for the injection/oral application.

I, the undersigned, in administrating the following vaccination and possible or probable coercion of the following individual/s agree to the injection of the required compound into the sovereign person named below.

I have understood the nature of the Plea and am willing to oppose it.

Name________________________________
Age_____________

Dated for the record, _____________________
During my training, I have been made aware that the vaccine is comprised of the following ingredients* and their evidential efficacy from independent laboratories or otherwise and that I, the undersigned, take full personal responsibility for any adverse effects upon the individual or individuals to which it is administered.
* (Please list all ingredients and all the laboratories (including independent laboratories) verifying the ingredients in the space below. If insufficient space, please attach a separate sheet signed, notarised and dated.)

All fields must be entered.

*1. List actual laboratories sanctioned by the 'authorities' regarding the ‘vaccine’, please append on a separate sheet signed and dated by the laboratories concerned.

Results from ingredients:

*2. List Independent laboratories:
Results and efficacy from ingredients:

Findings from *1 (Please list):

Findings from *2 (Please list):

Conclusions:

1. I affirm the findings for the vaccination on pain of death or destruction of my individual self that I vaccinate this/these individual/s despite contrary findings of vaccination efficacy to be my sole responsibility.

Signed_________________________Dated_____________________

2. I do not affirm the findings that vaccination is possible and have no wish to degrade my sense of humanity to spurious ends. I therefore decline to administer the vaccination.

Signed_________________________Dated_____________________

Signed and deputised by:

Administrator of the vaccine__________________Date__________

Deputy to Signed_________Date_________


***************************************************
Be well and safe,
Sharpstuff

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:39 am

THE 'IMMUNE' SYSTEM

I insist that I am never trying to be 'clever' here, or that I 'know' more than any-one else, merely trying to be logical.

I just wanted to have a word about the so-called 'immune' system since it seems to be a cornerstone of the 'germ', 'virus', 'bacteria', 'D.N.A./R.N.A.' theories about which I and others, have written many thousands of words.

The notion of the 'immune' system relies upon the belief in the first place of so-called pathogenic 'somethings' which 'attack' the body to make it ill.

If indeed no pathogens are part of Nature's 'arsenal' against all flora, fauna, soil and water, then why would we need an 'immune' system from them? It beggars belief.

The 'immune' system is only possible if one believes in pathogenic processes.

It seems that many dissenters of the (to be brief) 'germ' theory itself, are still convinced in some way, of this fabulous (as in 'fable') 'immune' system. They may believe there are no 'germs' etc. but seem to insist it is because of the 'immune' system. It does not compute!

There is hardly a point in believing half a lie, you are still only half there...

I will say this again: It is how you treat the terrain that produces an efficient crop for survival. It is our responsibility and that of caring for others who have difficulties.

There is a war against humanity that is unfolding. War is the back-bone of control one way or the other, whatever the reason. All wars are contrived, bar none.

As for 'medical' wars, I would refer you to this page (still extant) but no longer maintained. I believe I posted this before but I will repeat the message here.

https://sharpspeake.wordpress.com/2014 ... -medicine/

My apologies for repeating myself.

Be well,

Sharpstuff

dblitz
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:32 am

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by dblitz » Sat Nov 28, 2020 8:33 pm

Sharpstuff, you said:

'If indeed no pathogens are part of Nature's 'arsenal' against all flora, fauna, soil and water, then why would we need an 'immune' system from them? It beggars belief.'

Even if there are no 'germs' or 'viruses,' as they are presented to us, that doesn't mean there no pathogens at all and therefore no need for an immune system.

The immune system isn't just said to protect from 'germs' and 'viruses,' it is also said to protect the body from harmful bacteria, certain fungi, toxins (some produced by certain microbes) poisons (such as from a spider bite,) malfunctioning cells, protozoa and worms.

Even if there are no ‘germs’ or ‘viruses,’ that doesn’t mean our body doesn’t have a system to protect us from these other pathogens.

You said:

'Nature does not (or cannot) destroy itself otherwise we would not be here in the first place as it would destroy itself.'

An idealized view on nature - that it would never do any damage to another part of nature - sounds good, and there is a certain logic to it, but that is not what we experience when we encounter nature. There are multiple poisonous plants and animals that can harm or even kill us if we come into contact with them. Then there are the elements themselves, such as extremes of cold and heat that must be avoided for survival. Ultimately the way the human organism functions (or gradually increasingly malfunctions) eventually results in old age, debilitation, disease and death. I don't believe it was originally designed that way but that is what it's like now and if you consider the many ways we seek to mitigate the harmful effects of nature (including avoiding dangerous animals) you will realise it doesn't quite fit with the idea of something that would never harm itself. This is not to mention the constant occurrence of animals killing each other for food. Much of nature perpetuates itself by destroying other parts of nature.

The logic of:

‘Viruses might not exist therefore there is no immune system’ is the same logic as:

‘NASA lied about the moon landing therefore there is no such thing as space.’

This kind of thinking is a big temptation for conspiracy researchers and we need to be aware of it as we conduct our investigations or we will draw sweeping, erroneous conclusions from insufficient data or unfounded assumptions, even if there is some kind of logic behind our reasoning.

There are a lot more factors to consider than just viruses and immunization when looking at medical science. I have investigated a few sciences in detail and I have found that there is usually a core, or at least multiple threads, of truth running through them that are often obscured by, or intertwined with, unfounded assumptions leading to questionable conclusions as well as sometimes outright lies.

It often takes a lot of research to separate what is real in a science from these spurious elements. It is never a simple matter and is rarely achieved through logic alone. It is necessary to familiarize ourselves with as much of the trustworthy data, experience and genuine experimental investigation that has been conducted in the field (sometimes over centuries,) as we can before drawing too many conclusions.

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:03 am

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

My dear dblitz.

Firstly, thank you very much for your input.

Interesting monicker. I was born at Wanstead, England during a V1 bomb attack during WW2 about one month after the first V1 bombs descended upon London in 1944. I guess de blitz could be apt for me and members on this excellent forum being a blitz on deceit!

Given the somewhat difficulty in responding with quotations and replies, I have written it as a play.

**************************************************

THE VACCINATION DECEIT

(Enter Sharpstuff and Dblitz continuing a previous thread)

Sharpstuff:
If indeed no pathogens are part of Nature's 'arsenal' against all flora, fauna, soil and water, then why would we need an 'immune' system from them? It beggars belief.’

Dblitz: Even if there are no 'germs' or 'viruses,' as they are presented to us, that doesn't mean there no pathogens at all and therefore no need for an immune system.

Sharpstuff: I apologise. I did not make it plain that there are no ‘pathogens’ (or ‘viruses’ etc.) to compromise us. The word ‘pathogen’ is a construct from the meaning of two constructs, thus:
From:
[url]Link: https://ppdictionary.com/[/url]

‘Generally, the word 'pathogen' originates from the Greek word pathos meaning suffering, and gen meaning to give birth to. Thus, a pathogen is a generic term that describes any organism capable of producing a disease, such as a virus, bacterium, or other micro-organisms.

(Italics mine)

Thus a ‘pathogen’ thus includes ‘germs’, ‘viruses’ etc.

Dblitz:

The immune system isn't just said to protect from 'germs' and 'viruses,' it is also said to protect the body from harmful bacteria, certain fungi, toxins (some produced by certain microbes) poisons (such as from a spider bite,) malfunctioning cells, protozoa and worms.

Even if there are no ‘germs’ or ‘viruses,’ that doesn’t mean our body doesn’t have a system to protect us from these other pathogens.

Sharpstuff: There are no ‘pathogens’ other than those we invent to describe things that cannot be adequately described otherwise and have names attached to them for convenience, not actuality. As for ‘harmful’ bacteria they are human imaginary entities to explain natural processes.

Sharpstuff: 'Nature does not (or cannot) destroy itself otherwise we would not be here in the first place as it would destroy itself.’

Dblitz: An idealized view on nature that it would never do any damage to another part of nature - sounds good, and there is a certain logic to it, but that is not what we experience when we encounter nature. There are multiple poisonous plants and animals that can harm or even kill us if we come into contact with them.

Sharpstuff:
Of course! However, these ‘poisonous plants and animals’ are not part of a self-destructive mechanism unless we assume Nature is aware of itself and we could only speculate otherwise. In fact, Nature seems to provide all the mechanisms for averting such poisoning or by ‘fight or flight’ (the notion of ‘survival’).

For example, if you follow the ‘code’ of exploring the highways and by-ways, there may be, for example, ‘nettles’ that can sting you if you touch them but there are always ‘dock’ leaves close by that negate the effect. Other flora and fauna are aware of that. The need for survival relies upon mechanisms which must surely include the need for each other (in some way) either by eating, or repelling what is anathema to survival.

For example, there is always something that will eat the nettles without a problem. It is the process of survival, not a self-destructive process.]

Then there are the elements themselves, such as extremes of cold and heat that must be avoided for survival. Ultimately the way the human organism functions (or gradually increasingly malfunctions!) eventually results in an older age, or debilitation, disease and death.]

Dblitz: I don't believe it was originally designed that way…

Sharpstuff: By whom?…

Dblitz: …but that is what it's like now and if you consider the many ways we seek to mitigate the harmful effects of nature (including avoiding dangerous animals) you will realise it doesn't quite fit with the idea of something that would never harm itself. This is not to mention the constant occurrence of animals killing each other for food. Much of nature perpetuates itself by destroying other parts of nature.

Sharpstuff: No in my view, Nature doesn’t. Whatever we might call ‘Nature’ it is merely an expression of the ‘world’ upon which we inhabit. ‘Nature’, if you will, is that within which we ‘exist’ as a process; from ‘this’ to ‘that’. It is continuous without ‘start and stop’ (i.e. a continuous process).]

Dblitz: The logic of:

‘Viruses might not exist therefore there is no immune system’ is the same logic as:

‘NASA lied about the moon landing therefore there is no such thing as space.’

Sharpstuff: I was leaving the ‘not exist’ from my equation, as it were, trying not to be didactic and leaving a possibility of proof otherwise. I disagree anything with ‘space’ as a medium because ‘space’ means nothing is in it, and there patently is, if we look into the heavens and can observe the ‘moon’ for example. ‘Space’ relating to objects that are within it are a concoction for impossibilities such as those presented in ‘science fiction’ literature or ‘Star Wars’ and all that other stuff. There can be no conception of ‘space’ except that it represents an empty environment, which is impossible, since it is filled with ‘something’ whatever that is and about which we can only fill with speculation and to which we may apply the notion of some sort of ‘aether’ .

Dblitz: This kind of thinking is a big temptation for conspiracy researchers and we need to be aware of it as we conduct our investigations or we will draw sweeping , erroneous conclusions from insufficient data or unfounded assumptions, even if there is some kind of logic behind our reasoning. We therefore need to append our own investigations with many other thoughts upon the matter.

Sharpstuff: What kind of thinking? Who is drawing sweeping conclusions? What unfounded (?) assumptions? Yes, we do need to append our own investigations, this is precisely what Clues is all about.

Dblitz: There are a lot more factors to consider than just viruses and immunization when looking at medical science as presented. I have investigated quite a few sciences in detail and I have found that there is usually a core, or at least multiple threads, of truth running through them that are often obscured by, or intertwined with, unfounded assumptions leading to questionable conclusions as well as sometimes outright lies.

Sharpstuff: Good for you! More than 60 years of my 76 have been doing the same thing.

Dblitz: It often takes a lot of research to separate what is real in a science from these spurious elements. It is never a simple matter and is rarely achieved through logic alone.

Sharpstuff: Please explain.

Dblitz: It is necessary to familiarize ourselves with as much of the trustworthy data, experience and genuine experimental investigation that has been conducted in the field (sometimes over centuries,) as we can before drawing too many conclusions.

Sharpstuff:
What is ‘trustworthy data? ’Trustworthy data can only be a viable notion when it applies to us personally for our personal survival. ‘Proper science’ (whatever that may be, (in my view at least) is not ever drawing conclusions but investigating everything to find a satisfaction in our lives or at least trying.]

Be safe and well.

Sharpstuff

aa5
Member
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by aa5 » Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:11 am

We see with the flu that as biological science has gotten more advanced there is reasonable explanations for the flu and colds without resorting to infectious disease to explain it. The most likely explanation I have read is that the body goes through periods from time to time of autophagy.

What happens in autophagy is over time throughout the body more and more cells become non-functional, but not dead cells. These non-functional cells cause problems with homeostasis in various ways to the cells around them. And when there are only a few non-functioning cells there is no noticeable difference, but as more cells become non-functional the problems build up.

The body has evolved ways to deal with the problem of these dysfunctional cells. And that is autophagy. The body goes into this mode where it does a purging and wipes out large numbers of these cells in one big move. It does it in one big move because to kill cells like that requires temporarily changing the biochemical environment in the body towards autophagy.

When the autophagy is widespread and involves many of these dysfunctional cells the results are described in the medical literature as 'flu-like' symptoms. All the usual flu symptoms of the body purging itself. One small example is how the body shuts off appetite, as obviously it is not in the biochemical mode to add cells during this period. Another example is the vomiting which is the body expelling these cells which become quite toxic as they are broken down. And the body's filtration systems get overloaded trying to process all of this cellular material.

In defense of scientists from 100's of years ago they were not aware of autophagy or dysfunctional cells that are still alive. So they came up with their hypothesis of some invisible infectious disease triggering this process. The problem I have with past scientists was their coming to the conclusion that it was 'viruses' when they did not have evidence of that, it should have always been one hypothesis among many. But then again the common people they won't accept an answer from the 'priests' of the society that we simply don't know the reason.

The people in all ages in all places want to believe that the priests of their society know everything.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2247
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by fbenario » Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:49 am

aa5 wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:11 am
Another example is the vomiting which is the body expelling these cells which become quite toxic as they are broken down.
I await with baited breath your explanation of how these toxic cells from all around the body end up back in the stomach to be vomited.

sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: THE VACCINATION DECEIT

Unread post by sharpstuff » Wed Dec 02, 2020 8:24 am

SERIOUS SATIRE

Whilst paying good tax money from my various activities (as a working adult) and as a person trying to survive in an insane modern circus of ‘viruses’ etc. that I have no wish to be part of but as still an infant researcher of other things but am dragged into the circus Big Top of political domination, I find myself having to regard the many exhibits that apparently form a full circus.

Treating other animals as toys for others to play with (e.g. lions responding to violence upon their natural bodies and instincts etc.) is not something that endears my heart to the mechanics of cracking whips at them to comply with violent dictates, only the creatures themselves.

Whilst feats of extreme gymnastics such as Circe du Sollelei are to be admired, the treatment of innocent creatures to a crude whip and what amounts to torture, are not part of my scene.

It is evident that a great deal of humanity (mostly, everybody) is now being subjected to the whip for a lion’s compliance, not the value of our contribution in a caring fashion of excellence but the whip of command.

The tight-rope gymnast (the ‘average’ person) has fallen from the high-wire being constantly eroded by unseen but probably ‘elected’ nail-files (a.k.a. ‘politicians’) and we are plunged to a safety-net that does not exist.

After the lions have been tamed and the audience roars (!) with delight, then send in the clowns…

…some with intent only to make others (someone?) laugh at their ridiculous antics (hardly actually funny but who cares? Give me some more of that pop-corn!)

…some with an intent not only to make them laugh but also to laugh behind their backs…

However…

In a world outside of the Big Tent, we are forced by virtue of the circus owners (by means of their controlling their circus exhibits and potential responses) from our payment to enter their Big Top, they can present what they like based on prior amusement parks of their creation and so forth. This is valuable for their final Big Top (Great Re-set?) and the influence it has and will have. Clowns may give the laughter and the credible athletes give their expertise and the lion-tamers give the control. All in one success.

When all may be lost, send in the clowns. Apparently people love clowns, therefore they vote for them but they won’t for long laugh at them.

I did a research enquiry: regarding the latest notion of a vaccine for this new Corona virus scam:

How can they find a vaccine so quickly for covid?

This particular snippet answers a question to myself regarding how these so-called 'pharmaceutical' companies have such huge and elaborate 'technological' laboratories and all those heavily 'masked' and suited individuals forever putting 'this, that and the other' into all those test-tubes etc. concocting whatever (and claiming whatever) into phials of whatever, ready for the stabbing of unsuspecting victims with that concoction.

Here I found (interestingly the BBC):

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55041371

Please read the whole article (if you can bear it) and note the wordings and neologisms introduced, for example (give me strength!) ‘plug and play’! Could this perhaps be a reference to our favourite (apparent) ‘vaccination’ expert Mr. William Gates?

[Please make sure you have your barf-bag ready]

Example Quote:

'Ten years' vaccine work achieved in about 10 months. Yet no corners cut in designing, testing and manufacturing.'

My own reply to that:

'Wow! The magnificence of modern technology!' the uninformed masses cry. 'How wonderful those scientists are! How they can cure all our ills with these wonderful (choose any other suitable words) to save us from all these germs and viruses and other non-existent pathogens that their insane world inflicts upon us! The safety-net has not failed us! Let’s get vaccinated against all this and lead our lives in peace, tranquillity and security!

*************************************************************

I would be appalled to find anyone with even a modicum of ‘brain-cells’ to believe this drivel, couched, as usual in pseudo-scientific jargon. This is so sad…

…Send out the clowns…Let the Big Top deflate…let us go home…let us rest, not upon our laurels but rest from persecution…

As Hamlet intones upon his death: The rest is silence. (Meaning death but opinions and double entendre differ).

Be safe and well,

Sharpstuff

Post Reply