Any of this sound familiar…..

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   24 posts
Viewing 4 posts - 21 through 24 (of 24 total)
  • Wed, Jul 14, 2021 - 08:23am



    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 10 2021

    Posts: 95

    count placeholder3

    Any of this sound familiar…..

I have noticed two trends that I find suspect.

The first is that only the J&J issues are being reported. My sister had the Moderna two-shot and had blood clots in her lungs reducing her lung capacity to 30%. I guess that also means the shots were working, but why isn’t the same issues that are being reported with the Pfizer and Moderna shots being reported? I wonder why the double standard?

The second is that the head of Pfizer came out with telling everyone that a third booster is needed and Pope Fauchi said that it isn’t needed. He then said this was due to not enough people getting the first and second shots yet. he is known for lying when he has ulterior motives, so at least he told us what the motive was this time.

Is there a clue in these two discrepancies?  It appears that they don’t care if the single shot issues are talked about, just don’t say anything about the two-shot jab and they also don’t want to “waste” a third shot on the plebes when some haven’t been spiked yet. Any ideas?

  • Wed, Jul 14, 2021 - 08:36am



    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 28 2013

    Posts: 185

    count placeholder5

    J&J issues as a signal of motive

I’ve also been paying attention to which gene therapies get the negative headlines, as a contrarian indicator.  The fact that J&J gets the most negative reporting about side effects makes me consider that, if I’m coerced into a shot, J&J might be the best one to take.  The narrative seems to like it the least.

AstraZeneca also gets negative headlines, but I attribute that to normal trash talking of the competition for profits’ sake.

  • Wed, Jul 14, 2021 - 08:53am

    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 1068

    count placeholder4

    Any of this sound familiar…..


Pushing the mRNA vaccines is clearly a priority. I once read an article quoting Fauci (from years ago) and he really wanted a vaccine which could (in his mind) deal with any number of conditions, rather than simply the most emergent condition. The article did not detail what he had in mind. But the mRNA vaccines seem to fit the bill. The engineering of the mRNA vaccines is really the creation “delivery vehicles” meant to deliver mRNA to cells in order to tinker with the immune system. Once the “delivery vehicle” is perfected, then (theoretically) a new and different programming of cells simply requires the infusion of a different form of mRNA into “delivery vehicle,” which can then be injected into people. That is the concept.

The refusal to approve the “booster shot” may be due to a realization that the “delivery vehicle” is not ready for prime time. In other words, it is getting harder and harder to hide the deaths and disabilities as it is. And consider this. It seems that the majority of the really bad adverse events have happened after the second shot. Now, imagine a third so-called “booster shot” on top of the first two shots. The act of giving that “booster shot” to people already compromised by prior “vaccinations” may blow the cover completely.

Fauci may be just a desk jockey but he is already getting push back. He may understand that his entire vaccination dream could go up in smoke.

Based on a 2 week lag: yesterday 0.18%, today 0.17%.

Based on a 3 week lag: yesterday 0.30%, today 0.29%.

The downward trend continues.

Viewing 4 posts - 21 through 24 (of 24 total)

Login or Register to post comments