Activity

  • Profile picture of Rheba

    Rheba posted an update 4 years, 8 months ago

    Sorry if you all know this, but I did take a few days off from the usual review of usual internet sites, avoided all AI tools. I did explore some channels on Roku. Checked-out Epoch TV; it has great interviews. One was Dr. Bret Weinstein, an Evolutionary Biologist, whom YouTube demonetized. It was while listening to him that it finally dawned on me: this Jabbing Event was not research – human or otherwise. My background in Educational Research cause me to assume the Jabbed Event was some perverted sort of human research project with the usual research criteria by which to measure outcomes (documentation, control groups, database to record outcomes, efforts to eliminate variables, methodology for further study replication). First, check this out: https://www.theepochtimes.com/dr-bret-weinstein-perverse-incentives-in-the-vaccine-rollout-and-the-censorship-of-science_3885796.html Remove the medical research OP: thinking, thinking…. Direct culling??? No, too simple, too evil, too obvious.

    Then, I learned of this interview https://www.bitchute.com/video/6MS6wiOFb3dI/
    Singing hymns now; trying not to hyperventilate, wondering… Oh my opinion has change: Ron Paul has done everything for me to think ill of him and his kind.

    • Profile picture of FiatLux
      FiatLux replied 4 years, 8 months ago

      They could be “stacking functions” — it could be partly research to see exactly how mRNA jabs affect humans; partly population reduction, since they know a percentage of people will die; partly profit, since mRNA tech promises to be extremely profitable and since the long-term diseases suffered by some of the jabbed will also be profitable to the medical industry; and partly a way to get everyone on a control grid via lockdowns, track-and-trace, and vax passports. Looked at that way, it’s a mega jackpot for the powers that be.

        • Profile picture of Robert Barricklow
          Robert Barricklow replied 4 years, 8 months ago

          “They’re” cashing in on inst1tutional “trust”.
          [which is a high-minus trust-factor, in my case]

          • Profile picture of Rheba
            Rheba replied 4 years, 8 months ago

            Yeah, but that’s not medical research. They have created a shot that causes a disease which the body may not be able to recognize and kill in time. Then there’s the next shot if the body’s immune system can defeat the one from first set of shots. Didn’t get the shot – it sheds off those who did get the shot.
            Yes, what you have described may all happen, but it is more of a – “let’s see what will happen if we pull the wings off the grasshopper.” Or maybe “let’s see what will be left alive if we pour oil on the pond and light it afire.” The common thread is kill humans. How many are left after the disease caused by the shot, how many need another shot, how many can we track/hunt down to give another shot, what can we try with those who are still alive.
            Sorry, I guess my equilibrium is increased when I spend more time each day under AI influence. Like the frog in the pot of water on the stove burner.