civilisationReview

...because,  1. It impresses upon non-white people that whites do not know it all and that their own cultures can contribute and produce ideas that did not, and will not, be produced by them.  2. Such ideas will free white people from the tyranny of the particular kind of ignorance in perspectives and engendered by their unique history as they will be able to them access ideas and perspectives from other cultures.  3. Such access will disable their own white elite from capitalising on such ignorance which such elite may actually have produced, thrived on, and which thus gives them every reason to perpetuate.  Every culture that has an evil and exploitative elite will logically have cultural practices and perspectives that allows such an evil elite to exist in the first place.   Differences in historical experiences will give rise to different ways of putting up with it, supporting it, and contending with it.  It is from attentio...

The logical protocol should be, people who are NOT injected can carry on with life a usual. Those whom are fearful can stay home,  wear masks, await the vaccine, and wash their hands incessantly.  Strengthening the immune system naturally should be preferred as that is how humanity developed a strong immune system in the first place, as proven by growth in population since Adam and Eve,while long-term effects of Western 'vaccines' are not known.  Doing otherwise can create more problems than it solves, and most importantly, expecting people to inject themselves enables evil doers an uncheckable means to make people ill for profit, to killing for an agenda.   All other considerations are irrelevant to this bottom line.  Amen. edX

Fine. 1. As long as it can be proven beyond Reasonable Doubt that it is only the uninjected whom can spread the infection; produce killer variants; and that taking the injection will make it impossible for him to spread the infection or get infected by it.  And if all of the above can be proven beyond Reasonable Doubt, that means there is no reason for the individual to take it as those whom took it will be completely protected.  2. It must also be proven beyond Reasonable Doubt that this measure cannot kill or maim anyone as all lives are equal in value before the law and there is no reason for one to be subjected to possible harm or death to save another. To deny this is to subject the entire public this measure purports to protect to possible death to save their lives, which is a contradiction in terms, and which reveal such an exercise as heinous in nature by consequence, if not in intent, and may thus be deemed an Act of Terrorism requiring immediate acti...

So long as one person can die because of it, or one person can get sick despite taking it, saying it is 'safe and effective' and the 'benefits outweigh the risks' is the biggest misinformation of all.   Aren't lotteries sold with the encouraging, 'it could be you!' even if there is only one or a few top prizes?  How is this any different, except that there are much more 'winners' with the death lottery. If it is true that any ONE of EVERYone can die because of it, it is more of a Death Lottery than a Vaccine. This is evidenced by the risk of the former being more certainly quantifiable than the benefits of the latter. Hence, to coerce this is enforced enrollment in a death lottery and premeditated grievous bodily harm and murder. edX