There are three types of mindset involved in the Covid-19 debate and they are:
The genetics and immunity of travelers were created from a huge mix of people from all over the world over many millennia and this brought with it a huge diversity of natural biological evolution.
The evidence on closed societies where multiculturalism had not existed previously, as in the races you discuss, is that their biodiversity was not as comprehensive at the time of meeting other cultures.
This caused an adjustment period and people unfortunately succumbed to pathogens that they have not been previously exposed to.
The answer to this issue is to identify and capture a pathogen/virus; weaken it, and introduce it to the person's natural immune system so it can learn how to handle the "entire biology of the assailant".
This creates a very strong natural immunity that is passed on from mother to child and maintains society's health in a very progressive manner
We call this process 'vaccination' and I am 100% in favor of it.
Natural immunity requires nutrition to maintain its effectiveness but our society has been converted from natural foods, to scientifically created ones that weaken the immune system and this is a fact.
Many cultures and generations are prone to gravitate to these failing diets and so natural immunity declines in efficacy as well as creating the increase in 'other cause' hospitalisation which was at pandemic levels way before Covid-19 came along.
mRNA is a completely different technology to the historical definition of 'vaccine' and no matter what the short term research suggests, only in time will we know the result.
If it wasn't for the recent change in the definition of the word, 'vaccine', mRNA would have to be described as a drug and not a vaccine.
Try for yourself. Instead of using the word 'vaccine' to describe mRNA, call it what it is, 'a drug whose outcome over a period of time is unknown as of yet' and your thoughts on the subject may change.
I appreciate that some people trust science but I have seen far too many errors in science and medicine, and I have far too much experience to accept the unproven hypothesis that mRNA works until historically recognised test procedures have been completed and the hypothesis is replaced by absolute facts.
For example; is the theorised immunity created by mRNA passed on to the newborn or will all newborns require the mRNA drug at birth and if so, how often will they require a booster and at each dose, what is the possibility of serious adverse effects?
Time will tell but the question can only be answered by honesty and unfortunately honesty has been replaced with mandated coercion and that is simply a red flag that we should all be concerned about.
The 'public safety untested drug movement' simply wants the truth and in the failure to deliver an unbiased review of mRNA, the powers to be cause their own problems.
The lack of answers by the Government has been a very strong insult to many qualified people and the targeting of the 'unvaccinated' as being the problem is most definitely the recreation of apartheid, a false approach to resolving this pandemic, and has long lasting consequences.
I have seen first hand the effect of the mRNA injection and I have also seen the results of natural immunity. Natural Immunity is scientifically proven to be more long lasting and comprehensive. It is pretty compelling stuff but science would like for us to ignore this in favor of their patented technology that makes them rich. When money is involved, it is very difficult to trust some people and drug manufacturers have an exceptionally bad track record.
Type 1: It is the persons choice to have mRNA or not (Freedom)
Type 2: No choice, everyone must be mRNA injected (Control)
Type 3: Don't believe in untested drugs (Freedom)
Each group are very different in their philosophy and there is evidence to support each mantra.
False Belief 2:
Freedom Is Something Our Ancestors Fought For,
The PM just completely failed on this interview and it should have caused huge concern for many officials. No matter which Type of person you are, this interview was the start of the separation.
Type 2: No choice, everyone must be mRNA injected (Control)
Type 3: Don't believe in untested drugs (Freedom)
Each group are very different in their philosophy and there is evidence to support each mantra.
Type 1 and Type 3 people both agree on freedom of choice and so they work together but there are two distinct freedom foundations:
- One is human rights based on equality.
- The other is science and research based and comes up with alternate facts to what is being sold to the public by the Government and are a constant thorn in the Prime ministers side.
The two philosophies can live harmoniously together and can even accept Type 2 people as long as they only affect themselves in their beliefs.
But Type 2 people (Control based) ; by simple virtue of their belief, have some difficulty in accepting Freedom based people.
The Type 2 Government Employees pit themselves against the overall freedom movement on a daily basis in may theaters of battle including '3 Waters', '1080', 'Environmental', and 'Sovereignty'. There is no way the Government will listen willingly to the 'Freedom Movement' and anything they say is an automatic 'NO'.
"Freedom is people's inherent foundation."
We have never seen the Government listen to any other party on Covid other than those that agreed with the Government's position. The 'Freedom Movement' appears to be excluded from normal discussions and have been labeled by the Prime Minister as the problem.
To understand this; imagine being told you were no longer allowed to worship your God or hold your spiritual belief, or follow your Rugby Team and there would be no factual discussion about it!
This is what Freedom supporters are being told to do and it creates an expected response.
'No choice, you must have an untested drug injected into your body."
Pro mRNA drug aficionados use flawed reasoning to justify their beliefs and if you happen to present an inconvenient truth such as "The long term drug trials and independent peer review have not been completed yet", Type 2 people will just scoff at you and quote the fact that millions of the mRNA drug serums have been administered so therefore this is all the proof that is required.
"If you only have proof a drug worked after you injected everyone with it, that was an experiment and you will need to wait a while to know the outcome."
For some people they believe in what they hear very quickly. I find they watch the news or listen to talk back radio a lot and somehow get slowly switched over from an incredulous story, to believing everything they hear as the story is crafted to achieve the desired ratings. Whereas some of us have been through 'incorrect truths' too many times and we are very weary.
- You are declaring your knowledge is far superior but cannot back it up.
- You are injecting your drugs into our loved ones, including our children.
- You are trying to talk you way out of answering some very simple questions by diverting to something else.
- You use every psychological trick in the book to tell us that our nature is no good and only science knows the way.
- You are trying to convince the abused that they have not been abused.
So you can see why the 'Freedom of Choice' people are so upset when you casually declare that your belief is the only correct belief. For 'me'; I have no choice but to examine covid in the best way I can. No I am not a doctor, virologist, or biology scientist, but I am an analyst and my career has been for 40 years to work out the truth.
False Belief 1:
"Millions have been injected so therefore it must be safe!"
Reply: One important phase of testing a drug is to test all aspects of the possible side effects and this has not been done. In addition, many basic tests have not been performed and may never.
Here is a current excerpt from NZ's MEDSAFE review of the drug. Notice the highlights and this was just one section of the report. It is full of the same 'has not been studied' comments.
So if you accept the mRNA serum is safe, how do you include the above FACTs into your rational?
Long term side effects of drugs take years to discover (FACT). mRNA is a completely new drug and was rushed out for emergency use. There was no way to know if it was safe and now that they have rolled it out in millions of doses around the world, do you think the manufacturers or governments will want anyone to know the actual long term side effects?
False Belief 2:
Natural Immunity Doesn't Work
Reply:
Going all the way back to the beginning, see what the experts in the WHO were reporting:
They had already studied the virus and the majority of people would have only mild flu like symptoms and then recover. This 'recovery' would be the result of natural immunity so science and medicine did agree that natural immunity would work (FACT).
They also identified the 'at risk' people and they could have targeted them with a very rapid response that far exceeded the mRNA rollout.
This is what DR Fauci said about natural immunity until it suited him to say otherwise.
So many people had achieved natural immunity before the untested drug was released BUT the powers to be decided it wasn't good enough and made statements such as in the video below where NZ PM, "Jacinda Arden", announces to NZ and the World, that the problem isn't a virus or the people with a weakened immune system. No! The problem is her nemesis, the Freedom of Choice movement AKA "The Disgusting Unvaccinated!"
To me, a perpetual Labour voter; she just committed political suicide because she was so far off track and in this one video, her body language and presentation tells you so much:
“Whatever words we utter should be chosen with care for people will hear them and be influenced by them for good or ill.” (Buddha)
This video seems to tick all the boxes regarding the United Nations statute against Hate Crimes.
For those who do not realise it, people who do not want to take the mRNA drug have a particular common faith and that is the faith in nature and Mother Earth. It is self belief and is woven into the very daily culture of our family and being. This is a faith followed by millions.
From the video you can see the following:
- The PM states "The problem IS the Unvaccinated" as a FACT even though it is only a hypothesis.
- When the Government says that they are the only true source of information, and we hear this kind of non-factual statement, we are confused as to what we should believe.
- She is guessing her way and forming supposed facts from her opinions
- Her conversation indicates that she doesn't understand immunity
- She was just 'following experts' but doesn't site any references
- Clearly identifying a minority group in society that everyone else could blame for Covid and inciting public fear of the 'unvaccinated'
- The PM purposely caused discrimination
- The Vaccine Passport idea was trying to establish a mechanism to enforce discrimination
- Not looking after the rights and beliefs of minorities who had facts and irrefutable evidence on their side
The PM needs to govern on absolute facts or take into consideration ALL FACTS. She did not.
No matter which camp you are in, there has always been cause for doubt and as the leader of a 'Democratic Government', Jacinda's demeanor quickly changed from the defender of the minority;
to pronouncing her own media attack on her own voters, who she could not answer the questions of.
False Belief 3:
Trust the Science
Reply: Science is a process of success and failure and every scientist knows this to be the truth.
The mRNA technology was only in its infancy and had not proven it's effectiveness and safety to the date of the drug's released. Then when Donald Trump said that he was willing to accept any idea, mRNA put it's hand up and that was that. The marketing spin to secure the trillions of dollars of funding and revenue was put into motion and billions of dollars were spent promoting the safety of the drug, even though it was not FACTUAL.
If you were going to trust science, should you not include the entire scientific community?
Let us face it; in the past, whistle blowers of the truth are usually surrounded by people who turn a blind eye to it so you cannot just trust 'the majority are right' theory. There are many scientists and doctors who are appalled at their colleagues for their covid response but mainstream science just targeted anyone who had an opposing point of view and discredited them by calling them names, quacks, and fools. This is cyber bullying and there are laws against this. These 'quack' scientists have Nobel prizes, doctorates, published papers, vast experience, and in their 'expert opinion' there is an issue of our safety that has been ignored and alternatives that could have been engaged.
For example, this 'sciencebasedmedicine' web page called anyone who didn't agree with the untested mRNA, a "quack".
"When you’ve been examining pseudoscientific and quack claims for over two decades, you start to recognize patterns in the strategies and technique used by those denying science to promote their pseudoscience or quackery. Those who don’t pay attention to these sorts of issues might have been surprised by or unfamiliar with these techniques, but many skeptics were not. I was thinking about this sort of thing when I came across the latest propaganda from COVID-19 deniers, conspiracy theorists, and grifters known as the Great Barrington Declaration."
Whereas the actual Barrington Declaration the above writer singularly discredits, was founded on science, has nearly a million signatures, and holds true to this date as opposed to the belief that the vaccine (mRNA Injection) was safe and effective.
Freedom Is Something Our Ancestors Fought For,
But Most of us Just Let It Go!
Since the establishment of the Nuremberg Code we the people had rights above scientists:
The code of conduct for medical research involving human subjects that was composed after the Nuremberg trials of the Nazi war criminals in 1946–47. The central feature of the Nuremberg Code is contained in its first clause, which states that “The voluntary consent of the subject is absolutely essential.”
REF: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100242259
But during the government's SAR-CoV-2 management practices, these rights were discovered to be no-existent. They had been unceremoniously stripped from us during the historic Labour Government's tenure and replaced with much lesser rights in the "NZ Bill Of Rights".
For me and many others, this is a biting insult to all the sacrifices my whanau (family and ancestors) have made over hundreds of years for human rights. For all of us, these rights are the only things that separate us from owning our own life, and being owned by some other entity or device.
ANZAC Day will never be the same as government officials stand there saying their words about 'freedom' but failing to uphold it in their actions.
Some images that will never leave me:
A Government slogan for taking away your rights, a little reverse psychology: "Unlock The Things You Love" when in reality it was only the government locking them up.
The 'vaccine passport' was an attempt to launch a human control platform that would seriously limit your ability to function in today's modern society.
"Are you allowed here?"
No effort was made by the Mall to make this a pleasant experience.
This picture reminds me of one I saw in my history books.
A very slippery slope to have adopted.
This picture reminds me of one I saw in my history books.
A very slippery slope to have adopted.
"The Problem is the Unvaccinated"
No longer did we have a unified society trying to help one another. Instead our PM deliberately executed a strategy of 'Divide and Conquer!', but for what purpose and at what cost?
When I saw this interview I was shocked so much that I felt no longer safe in my community including what support I may get from the Police or Hospital staff. I immediately contacted the Police and laid a complaint because what I saw was an out of control Government who had the potential to do anything it wanted without any recourse. The police officer filed a report but after some time, my case was dismissed on no particular grounds.
This is when the freedom movement stepped up its presence and we connected.
The government ignored making any logical replies to the questions about long term safety or discussion about where it was getting its facts from because these facts and their approach was not shared by all science, medicine, and the conscientious public.
But the opportunity to control the public was always on some people's agenda and the ability to control everyone forever could be established with a vaccine passport. This is not conspiracy. It is a true aspect of having to show/scan a passport to enter a place.
Why are the policies of Helen Clark similar to our PM's?
The failure to respond to questions, and the pending mandates and children jabs, forced the Freedom Movement to take the legal action of protesting (it is part of our democratic rights) .
With no answers the protest grew into a peaceful camp where the Government used war tactics against its own people instead of answers.
People Damage
In all of this; the Covid-19 response has damaged a very important section of the community and they may never return. The people most affected were huge contributors to society and they were coerced to take the untested drug or lose their jobs, careers, income, families, and self belief.
Many of the companies, organisations, public facilities supported this apartheid because many stakeholders and managers are Type 2 people where 'control' is an important aspect of their operation. They cannot afford the time or money to go against Government Health and Safety policies and so they adopt policies immediately. It was easy for media to quote that big companies were complying with the Government policy and so from the viewers point of the view, everyone must have researched this and agreed with the facts of the strategy so therefore I will get the 'vaccine'. And so formed a consensus of opinion achieved through manipulation, strategy and coercion but not on actual facts.
Type 2 people would state: "The unvaccinated had a choice!" and I remember talking with a covid therapist and he said 'people make choices and choices have consequences'.
Coercion is not a legal method of getting a response. Its like saying: 'It was the customer's fault they got shot as the gun-lady did warn him not to run.'
The freedom of choice movement held commonsense as their foundation and commonsense said "don't take an untested drug'. No amount of saying that the tests have been done would erase the ABSOLUTE FACT that the tests had not been done. The belligerent Government's approach of denial, added more fuel to the fire of distrust.
And now we sit 27/8/22 and the truth (that has been available for all to see) is starting to come out.
According to a study of 20,000,000 people in the UK, since the 3rd booster, the drug known as the mRNA Serum and promoted as a vaccine, achieved negative effectiveness meaning that you were factually safer and more protected from Covid by not having the mRNA drug.
Read the report. It states that the 3rd Booster does not work REF: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.06.28.22276926v3
Death
Of the top ten causes of death, eight are self inflicted. People practice damaging themselves with their food and drink choices everyday and these two areas of failure are so very important to correct and develop within your own family and friends.
Nature is a beautiful thing. It isn't perfect and one day, no mater what, we will all rejoin the earth, sea, and sky in which we came from. Have no fear but be concerned when Governments start mandating that you have to take a new untested drug because the outcome is unknow (FACT) and the potential consequences are unknown (FACT).
This has been the first world wide GMO experiment on human kind.
It is a FACT that it is an experiment simply because they do not know the outcome.
It is a FACT that it is an experiment simply because they do not know the outcome.
I am all in favor of a drug that helps BUT an untested drug is simply not an answer.
FACTS + FACTS + FACTS but to some Type 2 people, I am speaking quackery because the best way to handle someone who ask a question you cannot answer, is to discredit them personally or use psychology to baffle your audience.
Method of convincing someone:
- State a fact "The sky in blue"
- State a second fact "The sea is blue"
- State something you want people to believe: So therefore "The land is blue"
2 out of three facts cause the listener to 'accept' into their subconscious the 'non fact' and even though they may question it, the next time it is stated 'The land is Blue' their subconscious recalls the memory and the extent of the non fact is lessened until the next time you hear, "The land is blue", some part of you accepts this as a fact and tries to create a picture of the land being blue even though you know it is not true. Repeated enough times, the non fact is now a fact but only in your mind.
So using this psychological trick, you only have to get the media to repeat stories crafted to achieve the result:
- State a fact "Vaccines Protect and are safe and effective"
- State a second fact * "mRNA serum is also called a vaccine" (this was only achieved by changing the definition of what a vaccine is)
- Link fiction to the facts: "Therefore because the mRNA is a vaccine it is also safe and effective."
mRNA fails the definition of all other historical vaccines. All other vaccines take the actual virus/pathogen, nutralise it, and then presented to your immune system for your natural immune system to form a comprehensive natural defense against the 'whole virus'.
But mRNA doesn't do this. It floods your body with an artificial protein spike, an attempt to replicate a fraction of the actual virus'. This causes your immune system to engage in a huge cleanup operation. The drug company suggest this causes immunity against the whole virus but the actual results are not seeing this. Long term immunity does not appear to be established unlike natural immunity.
If you can convince people that the new mRNA technology is a vaccine; then you can also imply that anyone who doesn't believe in the mRNA vaccine is an Antivaxxer. This is just not true.
Most people I know who are not mRNA injected, have every vaccine that was ever offered.
But mRNA only became a vaccine by quickly changing the definition of what a vaccine is:
* the definition of 'vaccine' was changed during Covid to include mRNA
November 7, 2021 by Sage Edwards
Why did the CEO of the drug company not take his own medicine?
Open this video in. YouTube and go to the 5 minute mark to see the answer.
Open this video in. YouTube and go to the 5 minute mark to see the answer.
I will leave this posting with one final video from YouTube.
A lass from my home town telling it like it is:
Bev Turner: I won't sleep until arrests are made over the 'scamdemic'
Please Comment
If you have some facts that support the mRNA drug deployment that I have missed, please let me know in the comments. I will research your point and be kind in my response. In all I feel it is your personal choice. If you want the convenience of taking a drug then do so but no drug comes without side effects. For me, my natural immunity has seen me through some tough times and it is my daily personal endeavor to learn about this immunity and maintain it. It's simple really.
- Eat Healthy and review what your body needs to maintain a healthy function
- Daily exercise
- Sunlight exposure
- Drink fresh clean water
- Cut out the bad habits
But for some, they prefer to forgo the effort of looking after themselves and instead, they prefer to engage in taking drugs. That is their choice and at the end of the day, it is your freedom to do so which is exactly the point.
Comments and Reply's
29/8/22 - Comment:
The Maori and Patagonians lived the natural healthy life style but that didn’t work. I was reading the journey of the Beagle in which Darwin describes in diary form his experiences in Patagonia. They were tough strong people but died easily against viruses.
Ron
Reply
The evidence on closed societies where multiculturalism had not existed previously, as in the races you discuss, is that their biodiversity was not as comprehensive at the time of meeting other cultures.
This caused an adjustment period and people unfortunately succumbed to pathogens that they have not been previously exposed to.
The answer to this issue is to identify and capture a pathogen/virus; weaken it, and introduce it to the person's natural immune system so it can learn how to handle the "entire biology of the assailant".
This creates a very strong natural immunity that is passed on from mother to child and maintains society's health in a very progressive manner
We call this process 'vaccination' and I am 100% in favor of it.
Natural immunity requires nutrition to maintain its effectiveness but our society has been converted from natural foods, to scientifically created ones that weaken the immune system and this is a fact.
Many cultures and generations are prone to gravitate to these failing diets and so natural immunity declines in efficacy as well as creating the increase in 'other cause' hospitalisation which was at pandemic levels way before Covid-19 came along.
mRNA is a completely different technology to the historical definition of 'vaccine' and no matter what the short term research suggests, only in time will we know the result.
If it wasn't for the recent change in the definition of the word, 'vaccine', mRNA would have to be described as a drug and not a vaccine.
Try for yourself. Instead of using the word 'vaccine' to describe mRNA, call it what it is, 'a drug whose outcome over a period of time is unknown as of yet' and your thoughts on the subject may change.
I appreciate that some people trust science but I have seen far too many errors in science and medicine, and I have far too much experience to accept the unproven hypothesis that mRNA works until historically recognised test procedures have been completed and the hypothesis is replaced by absolute facts.
For example; is the theorised immunity created by mRNA passed on to the newborn or will all newborns require the mRNA drug at birth and if so, how often will they require a booster and at each dose, what is the possibility of serious adverse effects?
Time will tell but the question can only be answered by honesty and unfortunately honesty has been replaced with mandated coercion and that is simply a red flag that we should all be concerned about.
The 'public safety untested drug movement' simply wants the truth and in the failure to deliver an unbiased review of mRNA, the powers to be cause their own problems.
The lack of answers by the Government has been a very strong insult to many qualified people and the targeting of the 'unvaccinated' as being the problem is most definitely the recreation of apartheid, a false approach to resolving this pandemic, and has long lasting consequences.
I have seen first hand the effect of the mRNA injection and I have also seen the results of natural immunity. Natural Immunity is scientifically proven to be more long lasting and comprehensive. It is pretty compelling stuff but science would like for us to ignore this in favor of their patented technology that makes them rich. When money is involved, it is very difficult to trust some people and drug manufacturers have an exceptionally bad track record.
Comments
Post a Comment