I disagree with almost everything Ransomnote publishes, and I try to make arguments based on other data which is posted online by UK, US or other government sources, sometimes the same sources Steve Kirsch or Dailyexpose are citing. I don’t think anyone should be censored for using whatever data they can find to make whatever argument they want to make. The UK vaccinated old people first, so Ransomnote claimed the vaccinated were dying at a higher rate, but ignored the fact that older people die at a faster rate than young people . Next he argued that vaccinated children in the UK were dying at a faster rate than unvaccinated, but ignored that the UK prioritized children with diabetes, cancer, etc. to get vaccinated. The vaccinated tended to be sick, therefore at higher risk from covid, so got vaccinated at a higher rate. He also ignored that in the UK you can get a “vaccine passport” without getting the vaccine. You just have to prove you already had Covid (natural immunity). So a large portion of the unvaccinated in the UK are naturally immune. I didn’t read these argument elsewhere on the internet. I read his posts, and the articles he linked to, and figured it out. So post away Ransomnote! The audience here is more clever than you think.
Thank you for another perspective.
According to the CDC’s own numbers, the Fauci/China biological warfare virus has a 99.74% survival rate.
75% of the people who died from it had four or more comorbidities.
Do you have a rational explanation for why a “vaccine” is even necessary?