The Vaccine: Don’t say you weren’t Warned

CNN:  Don’t be Alarmed if People Start Dying After Taking the Vaccine

In an article on the COVID vaccine rollout, CNN says that “Americans shouldn’t be alarmed if people start dying after taking the vaccine because deaths may occur that won’t necessarily have anything to do with the vaccine.”

The advisory appeared in an article titled ‘Why vaccinate our most frail?’ Odd vote out shows the dilemma’ in which Dr. Kelly Moore, associate director of the Immunization Action Coalition, cautions that “vaccines don’t work as well on the frail and elderly compared to healthy people”.

Now isn’t that exactly the main concern of those refusing the vaccine?  That a lot of people are going to die or become horribly sick after receiving this mRNA genetics-changing so-called vaccine?  Saying that the deaths and disease occurring after taking the vaccine is not attributable to the vaccine is nothing but a lie to trick the stupid into believing their stinking pile of bullshit. 

Combine this with the simple fact that there is no pandemic or epidemic at all, then why must the public be coerced into this scam.  It is certainly not for anything to do with health.  It is obviously to due with depopulation and transitioning survivors into transhumanized states.

Death statistics prove that there is not, nor has there been any pandemic.  By definition, pandemic is a situation involving excess mortality from some pathogenic source.  The statistics, which I have reported in a recent article on this site, clearly show that there is no excess mortality in any country in the world in 2020 compared to prior historical data. So follow along with me here…If no excess mortality has been found anywhere in the world, then, by definition, there is no pandemic anywhere in the world.

You would have to be certifiably insane to accept an unproven and admittedly dangerous new type of injection for a non-existing pandemic or disease.  You are healthy now.  Why rush to get the injection that is admittedly going to make you sick and in danger for your life?  It’s a ‘no-brainer’.

“When shots begin to go into arms of residents”, Moore said,  “Americans need to understand that deaths may occur that won’t necessarily have anything to do with the vaccine,” states the report.

“We would not at all be surprised to see, coincidentally, vaccination happening and then having someone pass away a short time after they receive a vaccine, not, of course, because it has anything to do with the vaccination but just because that’s the place where people at the end of their lives reside,” Moore said, whatever that means.

She then said “Americans shouldn’t be alarmed to see people dying a day or two after receiving the COVID vaccination”.

“One of the things we want to make sure people understand is that they should not be unnecessarily alarmed if there are reports, once we start vaccinating, of someone or multiple people dying within a day or two of their vaccination, who are residents of a long-term care facility”. “That would be something we would expect, as a normal occurrence, because people die frequently in nursing homes.” Yes, especially when they receive a lethal injection

The United Kingdom government has today announced its approval of the first Covid19 vaccine for general use.

800,000 doses are slated to be released for general use by the end of the week, and has already signed a contract for 40 million more doses (to go along with over 300 million doses of as-yet-unreleased vaccines from other companies).

With the newest phase in the Covid19 roll-out set to begin, it’s time we addressed the five biggest questions about this vaccine, its effectiveness, its safety and whether or not we’ll be forced to use it.


Clearly, the company claims it does, and the UK government seems to believe them. There is the obvious question as to what it means for the innoculation to ‘work’. ‘Work’ could imply causing death or giving immunity, in this case. The Guardian, in their coverage of the vaccine, claim it has a 95% efficacy rating, but does not provide a source for this or any kind of data at all, so you may as well disregard it.

Fortunately, better journalists and researchers are writing for the British Medical Journal, including this piece from Peter Doshi just last week.

To explain where this “95% effective” claim actually comes from:

The Pfizer vaccine trial included nearly 44,000 people. Half getting their vaccine, half getting a placebo. In total, from the 44,000 people, 170 were later recorded as having become ‘infected with Covid19’. 162 of them were in the placebo group, 8 of them in the vaccine group.

The vaccine is therefore credited with preventing 154 cases of Covid19…or 95%.

You don’t need to be a medical researcher or virologist to see how potentially flawed this reasoning is. The entire trial of 44,000 people is deemed a success based on the potentially multi-variant outcome from less than 4% of those involved. In addition, the method for determining “infection” is the only test available…the RT-PCR. Everyone knows by now that you can get whatever result you want from the PCR test by choosing the setting for what is called the PT, the number of exponential amplifications. Set the PT at or above 30 and you get a positive. Set it below 30 and you get a negative.

With this whole scam resting on totally flawed science and test equipment, there is no available meaning in anything done or reported. Plus, the PCR can only tell you “positive for the presence of virus”, which is not the same as “infection”. Every person, animal and plant in the world has trillions of virus ‘present’ within its own body at all times. Therefore, it is all meaningless and misrepresented.

The details of the trial are hard to come by, so we have yet to find out how these 170 people were even diagnosed with “Covid19”. Was it a clinical diagnosis based on symptoms? Or PCR test? Either method would raise serious questions about viability.

In short, the answer to “Does it work?” is “we have no idea.”


Potentially more important than the question of efficacy is the question of safety. No one, not even the vaccines most ardent defenders, is denying that this vaccine process has been rushed – vaccines typically take years and years to produce, whereas this one has been hurried on to the market in less than a few months. All of them have skipped important stages in testing altogether.

Even supposing the short term trials have not shown any side effects, there has simply been no time to do long-term outcome studies. The potential for complications, months or years down the line, certainly exists.

Further, the vaccine is based on new technology – an mRNA vaccine, which injects viral genetic material to generate a response. The technology has been in development for years, but this would be the first mRNA vaccine actually put to use.

So, again, the short answer to “is it safe?” is “we don’t know”.

However, the vaccine pushers and manufacturers clearly have doubts about its safety, since they have gone out of their way to guarantee they have total legal indemnity from prosecution or civil suits should something go wrong. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You can expect to be the loser in this deal.


This is a simple one. We don’t know, they won’t say. At least not in anything but the vaguest gibberish.


First on the docket are the elderly and NHS workers. We don’t know who will be excluded. Immunocompromised people were excluded from the efficacy study, so presumably, they’ll also be excluded from taking the vaccine. If not, that’s a potential disaster waiting to happen (although they have legal protection, so I guess that doesn’t matter to them).

The British military are already busily setting up “mass vaccination centres”. So eventually, of course, almost everyone will be expected to get injected if they want to partake of society in any way at all. Which leads us onto question five…


The question of “mandatory vaccines” has been buzzing around since the earliest stages of the pandemic narrative. The final result will obviously vary country-to-country, but it’s certainly a possibility here in the UK.

A few months ago a group of scholars submitted written evidence to the UK Parliament that mandatory vaccinations would be defensible on a human rights basis, and that there was already legal precedent for this action in UK legislation specifically, treating mental health patients who may be a danger to themselves. Now this is, of course, no precedent at all because mentally ill people, by definition, are unable to make good decisions for themselves. This has nothing to do with this case, at all.

In the end, the vaccine may never be literally legally mandatory. Parliament will reject the “expert advice” suggesting Covid19 vaccines be forced on people.

This will accomplish two goals at once: a) It will give the government a veneer of “libertarianism”, a thin facade to cover it’s tyrannical nature. And b) It will allow a potential “third wave” of Covid19 to be blamed on “vaccine hesitancy”.

Though it will probably never be literally mandatory, they will certainly make it much easier to function should you get the vaccine.

There’s been much talk of “immunity passports”, meaning digital documents showing your vaccination status which make you exempt from lockdown and social distancing rules.

In the future it’s not hard to see these documents (either physical or digital) being vital to the ability work, socializetravel, get loans, apply for state benefits, renewal of documents, or even receive medical treatment.

*To sum up – we don’t know what’s in the vaccine, we do know there is no pandemic, so exactly what non-existent pathogen is it intended to defend against?, it admittedly is not safe, and we’re probably going to be coerced to death in the attempt to make us take it.

Leave a Reply