Cognitive dissonance.

Many here are proud of playing a lead role in this mass psychosis. Even after 18 months I still can't believe I'm living through a digital rendition of 1984.

Two weeks to flatten the curve has become, according Fauci, three shots in a 12 month span to feed your family or you're labeled unvaccinated, along with all the propaganda shaming of wanting to kill grandma if you decide not to get a third shot.

I could understand people complying with these mandates for a myriad of personal reasons based on their own beliefs and overall cost benefit analysis, but it's a completely different story to see people advocate for this dystopian nightmare after being subject to the psy-op and shifting goal posts for the last 18 months. Yet here we are. It's fascinating and scary all at the same time.

Back to the original point; what is the predicate for mandating a shot that doesn't prevent transmission....... in order to stop transmission?

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

 

1. First off, this 2021 not 2019 so you're not allowed anymore to post or share information that contradicts the CDC or other governmental agencies, even if you're a certified physician like the author of this article. To do so is now labeled misinformation. Let's hope this author doesn't have his medical license revoked and/or his position terminated. Because we all know that science is finite and not about discovery. Bottomline, while this author makes a compelling argument, I've been told I need to dismiss it out of hand because it contradicts the narrative set forth by the CDC Director and Dr. Fauci.

2. Why is the most heavily vaccinated country in the world in terms of total shots per adult population have one of the higher case rates? How is that level of transmission possible in a highly and multiple vaccinated population given this authors claim?

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

 

Wow, so you 100% didn’t understand the article. Are you illiterate?

 

Wow, so you are 100% deflecting. Cool.

Seriously though, while I may disagree with that doctors claim, I thought his reasoning was sound based on the data he referenced.

Anyway, back to 2021 and our dystopian nightmare. Let's hope he doesn't get terminated for posting disinformation. While he may be ultimately correct on this issue and the government incorrect, as we've seen numerous times over the last 18 months, the government along with the large tech companies will not allow any deviation from the sanctioned narrative. In terms of scientific or medical truth the CDC is the sole arbiter and they clearly state this doctor is wrong and spreading misinformation. He even highlighted this fact in his subversive expose, errrr I mean article, that he disagrees with the CDC. We're not allowed to deviate from that.... those are the new rules.



Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

 

No, you are literally using the same thought process as a brick wall.

As the article succinctly pointed out, if you have a room full of vaccinated people, of course the amount of vaccinated people will be higher.

Every population that has a high vaccination rate, also has hospitals full of unvaccinated COVID patients.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-well...ed-11632999601

I have absolutely no idea what you’re yammering on about regarding the doctor in the article getting terminated for. That makes absolutely no sense. The only people getting cut off from social media are anti-vaxxers like yourself for spreading garbage propaganda. You are being manipulated by Russian troll farms, and proud of it. It’s pretty hilarious actually, because you have absolutely no idea how badly you’re being played.

 

To answer your question, the predicate is Jacobson vs Massachusetts which was decided by the Supreme Court. The smallpox vaccine is and was not 100% efficacious, yet it was mandated. The Supreme Court spoke and it is the law of the land and it has been for over 100 years. That is a direct answer to your question and assuming you live in the United States it applies to you and since FedEx is a company operating in the United States it applies to the company and it’s employees in the United States.

Now as to your argument that we live in the equivalent of 1942 Germany, I’m going to have to do some major research to answer such a well thought out and not at all lazy argument. I’ll start by reading “The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich” again and see what I missed the first time. Will report back soon listing all of the similarities.

 

I don’t think they will mandate it. They just won’t pay you if your trip goes to a country that requires it and you need to be removed from said trip. Which is fine.

 

I think you are being pretty optimistic that they will play that game. Maybe for a little while out of necessity. But as an international pilot, there is a requirement to maintain the credentials necessary to operate to ALL the locations in that fleet’s bid pack. No one has a contractual right to a seat (or FDA base) if they aren’t willing to do that. Eventually my guess is someone who has a list of countries they can’t fly to will need to move to a fleet that primarily flies domestic. Which is fine.

 

I’m fine with that too. Actually it’s preferable. No one senior should have to cover a junior persons trip, unwillingly, if that person can’t fulfill their obligation to the company due to their choice.

 

"Russian troll farms".... nice talking point. It's been awhile since that has been used.

If you aren't aware of the censoring of established professionals in the field of medicine, science, virology then you simply aren't paying attention.

Why don't you look up the Great Barrington Declaration. Some of the most distinguished MD's and scientists at some of the leading world's universities have been censored via social media, but also to include their own universities simply for taking the same position of infectious disease that they had in Dec 2019.

But if you want to believe in the fallacy that it's just gullible internet "anti-vaxxers" then be my guest. If there is one thing over the last year and half it's that you cannot convince people of the magnitude of departure from societal norms perpetrated by this mass physcosis. Because ultimately it's a belief system/worldview disagreement, not a debate over science or public policy and it's seems to be the case here as well.



Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk