There Are Four Types of People, Not Two

[Brian4Liberty]

Everyday, the media comes out with some statistic related to COVID, vaccines, case numbers, hospitalizations and deaths. Often these talking points are nothing but lies, or at best, not very well thought out (logically, scientifically, statistically).

Let's talk about vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. This is often a dividing line, and when used, demonization of the unvaccinated is usually close behind. The unvaccinated are the bad guys. Even evil.

What factors blur the line between unvaccinated and vaccinated? Vaccination is simply an attempt by modern medical science to fool the body into thinking it has had an infection. Thus, how do those who recovered from actual infection differ from those who had a vaccine? If vaccinated is good, prior infection is better.

But it is not just two categories of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. We have (1) unvaccinated people who had an infection, and (2) we have vaccinated people who had an infection prior to vaccination. Then we have (3) people who never had an infection, and were never vaccinated. Likewise, we have (4) people who never had an infection, and did have the vaccination.

That is four categories of people, and any hypothesis or statistic that tries to pit vaccinated vs. unvaccinated must take that into account, otherwise it is not science, it is propaganda.

If a person is hospitalized for COVID, we must know more than simply vaccination status. What if the person had a previous COVID infection? We always hear some stat on whether a hospitalized person was vaccinated or not. It would also be interesting to know if the person had a previous infection.

Why? Consider this possibility. What if people who had a prior infection are not being hospitalized now at all? What if all hospitalizations are among those who never had the infection, regardless of vaccination status? How does this effect vaccination breakthrough statistics? Even if the vaccine was 100% ineffective, there are vaccinated people who previously had the infection. Is the vaccine protecting them, or is it the previous infection?

One thing is for certain, they are muddying the waters as much as possible. When that happens, you know that there are agendas other than the truth and science at work.

 

[osan]

Valid points.

I was wondering the other day whether this is the "mark of the beast" written about in Revelation(?). It predicted one will be unable to buy in the markets, nor work without it. OK, it says forehead or wrist (hand?)... Well, it may be baloney, or what if it isn't? Could this be the mark? I ask because all these companies are jumping on the "cannot work here if you are unvaccinated" bandwagon. This is very dangerous and it must be nipped now before it becomes de-facto law.

Wifey just got notice from United that she has to be vaccinated. There's a group a gwyne a git a lawyer. I wholly support this.

Anyone know a good lawyer might take this on for blood?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Valid points.

I was wondering the other day whether this is the "mark of the beast" written about in Revelation(?). It predicted one will be unable to buy in the markets, nor work without it. OK, it says forehead or wrist (hand?)... Well, it may be baloney, or what if it isn't? Could this be the mark? I ask because all these companies are jumping on the "cannot work here if you are unvaccinated" bandwagon. This is very dangerous and it must be nipped now before it becomes de-facto law.

Wifey just got notice from United that she has to be vaccinated. There's a group a gwyne a git a lawyer. I wholly support this.

Anyone know a good lawyer might take this on for blood?

It’s almost like we need an organization that is dedicated to defending civil liberties in court. Too bad there isn't one (that I can think of off the top of my head).

 

[osan]

It’s almost like we need an organization that is dedicated to defending civil liberties in court. Too bad there isn't one (that I can think of off the top of my head).

If that is a snarky reference to ACLU, I already thought of that and immediately disregarded the notion. I suspect they would be 109% behind the vaccine program.

 

[cavalier973]

Valid points.

I was wondering the other day whether this is the "mark of the beast" written about in Revelation(?). It predicted one will be unable to buy in the markets, nor work without it. OK, it says forehead or wrist (hand?)... Well, it may be baloney, or what if it isn't? Could this be the mark? I ask because all these companies are jumping on the "cannot work here if you are unvaccinated" bandwagon. This is very dangerous and it must be nipped now before it becomes de-facto law.

Wifey just got notice from United that she has to be vaccinated. There's a group a gwyne a git a lawyer. I wholly support this.

Anyone know a good lawyer might take this on for blood?

According to Revelation, the mark of the beast is an act of worship—worship of the Antichrist. Preceding its being mandated, and angel flies through the sky, warning everyone of the penalty for taking the mark. No one is tricked into taking the mark of the beast.

 

[Swordsmyth]

According to Revelation, the mark of the beast is an act of worship—worship of the Antichrist. Preceding its being mandated, and angel flies through the sky, warning everyone of the penalty for taking the mark. No one is tricked into taking the mark of the beast.

This is just a dress rehearsal to condition people.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Valid points.

I was wondering the other day whether this is the "mark of the beast" written about in Revelation(?). It predicted one will be unable to buy in the markets, nor work without it. OK, it says forehead or wrist (hand?)... Well, it may be baloney, or what if it isn't? Could this be the mark? I ask because all these companies are jumping on the "cannot work here if you are unvaccinated" bandwagon. This is very dangerous and it must be nipped now before it becomes de-facto law.

Wifey just got notice from United that she has to be vaccinated. There's a group a gwyne a git a lawyer. I wholly support this.

Anyone know a good lawyer might take this on for blood?

Rabbi Offers Religious Vaccine Exemptions for All Faiths to Avoid Experimental COVID-19 Shots
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/rabbi...-faiths-to-avoid-experimental-covid-19-shots/



DOWNLOAD COVID VACCINE RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION DOCUMENTS HERE
https://news.gab.com/2021/07/29/important-download-covid-vaccine-religious-exemption-documents-here/
Also here
https://www.coreysdigs.com/solution...-employers-are-requiring-covid-19-injections/
Forced to Get COVID Vaccine? ICAN Offers Help
https://stuartbramhall.wordpress.com/2021/01/30/forced-to-get-covid-vaccine-ican-offers-help/

 

[Lindsey]

Valid points.

I was wondering the other day whether this is the "mark of the beast" written about in Revelation(?). It predicted one will be unable to buy in the markets, nor work without it. OK, it says forehead or wrist (hand?)... Well, it may be baloney, or what if it isn't? Could this be the mark? I ask because all these companies are jumping on the "cannot work here if you are unvaccinated" bandwagon. This is very dangerous and it must be nipped now before it becomes de-facto law.

Wifey just got notice from United that she has to be vaccinated. There's a group a gwyne a git a lawyer. I wholly support this.

Anyone know a good lawyer might take this on for blood?

I have often wondered since we don't understand the residual effects on the soul from having been contained in a human body, what if genetic manipulation has a lasting effect on the soul?

She may want to check in with some of the people listed on this page; they are working on related suits:
https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/legal/

 

[osan]

This is just a dress rehearsal to condition people.

In part. The other? Think "Lawrence Olivier". Think "Marathon Man". Think "Is it safe?"

Condition indeed, as in "are they ready for the big one yet?". I'm wondering if Theye are going to keep us bent over now, until the big one is delivered into the place they intend it to go.

 

[osan]

Rabbi Offers Religious Vaccine Exemptions for All Faiths to Avoid Experimental COVID-19 Shots
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/rabbi...-faiths-to-avoid-experimental-covid-19-shots/



DOWNLOAD COVID VACCINE RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION DOCUMENTS HERE
https://news.gab.com/2021/07/29/important-download-covid-vaccine-religious-exemption-documents-here/
Also here
https://www.coreysdigs.com/solution...-employers-are-requiring-covid-19-injections/
Forced to Get COVID Vaccine? ICAN Offers Help
https://stuartbramhall.wordpress.com/2021/01/30/forced-to-get-covid-vaccine-ican-offers-help/

I don't need no steekeeng rabbi. I exempted myself back in '85 when I started my first graduate degree. Those dopey people at CUNY said nothing to me about vaccinations being required until I was registering for classes when they demanded proof of vaccination. As I recall, it was not for any particular vaccine, but for an entire list of them.

Luckily for me I was a lot faster on my feet in those days and immediately understood what what going on and claimed religious exemption. They tried like the Satan to cow me into getting vaccinated for maybe five minutes, until I went all ACLU on them, which they never saw coming. I have to admit my amusement when I saw the looks on their faces, as if Michelle Obama had just jacked a load in their mouths from his black missile when I mentioned to them that they were attempting to violate my 1A rights. They then tried to maneuver me into admitting I was citing a phony baloney exemption by grilling me about the name of my religion. Amateurs. I told them that it was not their business and that I was in no way required to prove anything to them. More Michelle toxin, and up went the white flag. But in their humiliation of defeat, they required I make a written statement about my claim, which I did in the desire the get those apes off my back so I could get my classes secured and go on with my day.

This notion of having to prove you are "safe" is by no means new; certainly not in the hell-stinking shit hole of New York City where they've been incubating the mindset of servitude for 200 years, +/-.

 

[jmdrake]

Everyday, the media comes out with some statistic related to COVID, vaccines, case numbers, hospitalizations and deaths. Often these talking points are nothing but lies, or at best, not very well thought out (logically, scientifically, statistically).

Let's talk about vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. This is often a dividing line, and when used, demonization of the unvaccinated is usually close behind. The unvaccinated are the bad guys. Even evil.

What factors blur the line between unvaccinated and vaccinated? Vaccination is simply an attempt by modern medical science to fool the body into thinking it has had an infection. Thus, how do those who recovered from actual infection differ from those who had a vaccine? If vaccinated is good, prior infection is better.

But it is not just two categories of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. We have (1) unvaccinated people who had an infection, and (2) we have vaccinated people who had an infection prior to vaccination. Then we have (3) people who never had an infection, and were never vaccinated. Likewise, we have (4) people who never had an infection, and did have the vaccination.

That is four categories of people, and any hypothesis or statistic that tries to pit vaccinated vs. unvaccinated must take that into account, otherwise it is not science, it is propaganda.

If a person is hospitalized for COVID, we must know more than simply vaccination status. What if the person had a previous COVID infection? We always hear some stat on whether a hospitalized person was vaccinated or not. It would also be interesting to know if the person had a previous infection.

Why? Consider this possibility. What if people who had a prior infection are not being hospitalized now at all? What if all hospitalizations are among those who never had the infection, regardless of vaccination status? How does this effect vaccination breakthrough statistics? Even if the vaccine was 100% ineffective, there are vaccinated people who previously had the infection. Is the vaccine protecting them, or is it the previous infection?

One thing is for certain, they are muddying the waters as much as possible. When that happens, you know that there are agendas other than the truth and science at work.

True. And there is SO much misinformation put out by the powers that be! People have let go of their common sense. It's sad. The same people who will say "Everyone must be vaccinated because we don't know the long term side effects of the virus" ignore the fact that we don't know the long term side effects of the vaccine. Point out that the vaccine hasn't even been fully approved yet and they say "True. I hope they hurry up and fully approve it" as it that will somehow MAGICALLY make it safe. They'll point to how good previous vaccines like smallpox worked and extrapolate that to the COVID vax. But the COVID vax, by the best numbers so far, is only 39% effective. The smallpox vaccine was 95% effective. In some countries, like Nigeria, smallpox was eradicated with only 50% of the population getting vaccinated by using a "ring vaccination" method. But that can't work when you have a crappy, 39% success rate. The fear these people have of the unvaccinated is that they will spread the disease. But even Fauci had to admit that you can be vaccinated, catch the virus, and STILL spread the disease because you have the same viral load as an unvaccinated person that has the disease. Oh, and I had someone tell me the other day that if your vaccinated you can spread the disease even if you don't catch it. That of course is NOT true. You can be asymptomatic, but you still caught COVID. Why is that important? Because when you catch it and get over it, you have immunity going forward that's at least as good as being vaccinated. But you can't tell these people anything. They think they are SOOOO sophisticated because they follow the boob tube, Fauci, "science."

 

[jmdrake]

According to Revelation, the mark of the beast is an act of worship—worship of the Antichrist. Preceding its being mandated, and angel flies through the sky, warning everyone of the penalty for taking the mark. No one is tricked into taking the mark of the beast.

You are half right. The mark of the beast is about worship. But many people will be deceived.

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out — that serpent of old called the Devil and Satan, who deceiveth the whole world. He was cast out onto the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Revelation 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Why do you think the mark of the beast is received in the forehead or the hand but the seal of God is received only in the forehead? The forehead represents the mind. Everyone who is saved believes the gospel. Some who are lost believe they are doing the right thing and they receive the mark in their forehead. (Proverbs 14:12 There is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is the way of death.) Those who receive the mark in their hand are those who know better but follow the beast out of fear. (James 4:17 Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.)

As for the angel giving the final message? That's open to interpretation as to if it will be a literal angel or if the angel represents God's people spreading his message through the airwaves. After all in Revelation an angel told John not to worship him because he was a fellow servant like John. (Revelation 22:9).

 

[Brian4Liberty]

...But it is not just two categories of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. We have (1) unvaccinated people who had an infection, and (2) we have vaccinated people who had an infection prior to vaccination. Then we have (3) people who never had an infection, and were never vaccinated. Likewise, we have (4) people who never had an infection, and did have the vaccination.

That is four categories of people, and any hypothesis or statistic that tries to pit vaccinated vs. unvaccinated must take that into account, otherwise it is not science, it is propaganda.

If a person is hospitalized for COVID, we must know more than simply vaccination status. What if the person had a previous COVID infection? We always hear some stat on whether a hospitalized person was vaccinated or not. It would also be interesting to know if the person had a previous infection.

Why? Consider this possibility. What if people who had a prior infection are not being hospitalized now at all? What if all hospitalizations are among those who never had the infection, regardless of vaccination status? How does this effect vaccination breakthrough statistics? Even if the vaccine was 100% ineffective, there are vaccinated people who previously had the infection. Is the vaccine protecting them, or is it the previous infection?

One thing is for certain, they are muddying the waters as much as possible. When that happens, you know that there are agendas other than the truth and science at work.

Just to emphasize, the following group “(2) we have vaccinated people who had an infection prior to vaccination” is always included in “vaccinated” statistics by the propagandists. But they have natural immunity from a prior infection, so they can not be used as evidence of vaccine efficacy. Invalid stats.

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

I suggest to find and present the best person that can articulately present hard facts to Joe Rogan and get Rogan on board to debunk the narrative. Like Rogan or not he has a huge following and he has skin in the game.

 

[Invisible Man]

I don't know if anyone out there is putting in serious effort to get good statistics that are kept up to date with people broken down into all 4 categories.

Last time I went hunting for data out there about reinfections of people with previous infections there was some stuff out there, but not much. And it's the kind of statistic that could get outdated fast.

But at the time the number of people who had actually gotten sick with symptomatic COVID 19 two separate times was absolutely minuscule (not measuring mere cases, where they count positive tests, but actual symptomatic sicknesses). Known examples of it were in the low hundreds worldwide. And that was not right at the beginning of the pandemic, it was after it had worn on a good number of months.

 

[Working Poor]

No mention of how a person's beliefs are in this and how many people may have gotten a placebo jab and believe they are protected and don't get sick or do get sick..

 

[acptulsa]

5) is getting to be a huge group--people who came down with covid after being "vaccinated".

 

[Brian4Liberty]

5) is getting to be a huge group--people who came down with covid after being "vaccinated".
...

Yes, a huge group. And I would hypothesize that the vast majority of those who are vaccinated and get Covid come from this group:

(4) people who never had an infection, and did have the vaccination.

Yet the pharma industry and their brainwashed cult will do anything they can to avoid that reality.

The true immunity we are seeing is probably coming from natural immunity after infection (either symptomatic or asymptomatic). I know plenty of people who had Covid. Many of them got vaccinated even though they already had natural immunity. They, and the media, would say that they haven’t caught Covid again because of the vaccination, an invalid and unscientific conclusion.

Yet I also know people who never had Covid. They were vaccinated, and it didn't help them at all. They caught Covid after being fully vaccinated, and had cases that were just as bad as if they had never been vaccinated.

Current Covid vaccinations don't prevent infection and transmission, and they likely don’t even lessen symptoms.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I don't know if anyone out there is putting in serious effort to get good statistics that are kept up to date with people broken down into all 4 categories.

Last time I went hunting for data out there about reinfections of people with previous infections there was some stuff out there, but not much. And it's the kind of statistic that could get outdated fast.

But at the time the number of people who had actually gotten sick with symptomatic COVID 19 two separate times was absolutely minuscule (not measuring mere cases, where they count positive tests, but actual symptomatic sicknesses). Known examples of it were in the low hundreds worldwide. And that was not right at the beginning of the pandemic, it was after it had worn on a good number of months.

At this point, there are almost no valid statistics on these things. This has not been a controlled laboratory experiment. Verification of confirmed cases has been flawed by wildly inaccurate tests. Categorizations of deaths has been flawed because of political and monetary pressures and incentives. Tracking the combination of previous infection and vaccination has not even been attempted (probably for a reason).

One thing we do know is if someone has been vaccinated, and whether they subsequently come down with Covid. This does unquestionably prove that the current vaccines are not effective in preventing infection or spread. That is a valid conclusion.

But the opposite half of that statistic proves nothing. People who are vaccinated and do not come down with Covid in no way proves any level of efficacy. But that is the invalid conclusion they are trying to push.

A vaccinated might not come down with Covid for many reasons: 1) they never get exposed, 2) their immune system can handle the virus asymptomatically, 3) they already had the infection and they have natural immunity, 4) the vaccine is working, 5) other.

Jumping to the 4) conclusion without a lot of other information is ridiculous, yet that is what they are doing.