Here's something rather curious: two announcements in two different countries detailing hospitalised coronavirus patients, the one in the UK states that 60% of patients were double vaccinated, the one in Australia states that all but one were vaccinated, both speakers later retract their statements:
Spending over 1 minute to explain why more vaxxed people were in hospital, then it clearly wasn't just a slip of the tongue.
Therefore taking the 60% at face value as it most likely is the correct figure poses problems to the narrative that vaccines protect against Covid and that the symptoms if one gets it are mild.
The
current number of fully vaccinated people in the UK is currently 54.4% (and less when the statement was made last week). If the vaccine didn't protect against Covid infection but was neutral, then one would think that the percentage would be pretty much 54.4%. Since the number is greater, then it points to that the vaccines actually make people more vulnerable to catch Covid.
As for the argument that if double vaxxed people catch Covid, then the symptoms will be milder. Yet, getting to hospital is not a mild condition, but would be classified as a severe reaction. So again the narrative falls as proportionally more people who are double vaxxed are experiencing severe symptoms.
One argument to counter, will be that this is the delta variant and therefore the vaccine is not so effective. Given the 60% figure, then it is not only 'not so effective' against the Delta variant if we go with the variant explanation, but it appears to make people more vulnerable to catch it than is the case with the non-vaxxed people.
Given that this is said by intelligent people, who have many skilled people in the background to look at these numbers and draw logical conclusions, then one can only conclude that they are wilfully lying to the public. In this case Sir Patrick Vallence, the UK science chief, is actually lying continuously as his correction statement is implausible given his initial lengthy explanation and thus also a lie.
When you ask for people to discriminate against other people so openly then you run into some headwinds. When you ask for people to ignore their humanity, then you're essentially asking for the majority of humans to take on a psychopathic nature and I don't know if the majority have it in them to do that. Maybe it worked for the NAZIs because they had something in their nature to make it easy to take on such a cold nature but not all races or groups will so easily take on such an absurdity.
The bolded part does not hold water as it as far as I can see as it approaches the old argument that Nazis were nasty because they were Germans and that other 'races' wouldn't do that. In light of what we have seen over the last 18 months, then I for one have come to better understand how Nazi Germany developed and to understand the great difficulties and choices which many Germans experienced living during the 30'ies and the rise of Nazism. Books like, "they thought they were free" by Milton Mayer and "Defying Hitler" by Sebastien Haffner have been illuminating for me to read.
Yet what we have seen in the last few years with postmodernism, SJW, global warming hysteria, BLM, Antifa, gender-bender ideologies and lastly with Covid, has been the master lesson of how ponerological movements rise and take over the thinking capacities of whole societies leading to enormously destructive results. Nazism was only an example of it and we chose not to learn from it, despite all the rhetoric from the post-war generations of "Lest we forget". So it was not due to socalled racial profiling, but due to an inner orientation of a proportion of people as described well in "Political Ponerology".
Two phrases from the C's stand out in this context: "Nazi Germany was only a trial run" and "United in suffering". At the time when it was mentioned, I found it hard to imagine how such things could come about but now it is not difficult to see at all. It is what we are living to experience and learn from.
johnplatinumgoss.com
dailyexpose.co.uk
