Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Yogafist

“A virus with a 99.8% chance of survival is a ‘grave danger’?”

If one looks at the language:

grave danger -> danger that can cause someone to wind up in a grave
(even a danger that stands a .2% chance of putting someone in a grave is a ‘grave’ danger.)

[Note: Since so many have already died, the risk is now far less.]

serious danger -> danger that is associated with blood loss.

I like to use language in a rather strict manner. I find my local school district’s policy of frowning on student dictionary use highly objectionable.


17 posted on 09/23/2021 9:17:57 PM PDT by Brian Griffin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Brian Griffin
grave danger -> danger that can cause someone to wind up in a grave
(even a danger that stands a .2% chance of putting someone in a grave is a ‘grave’ danger.)


So why aren't they mandating 'vaccines' and testing for the multitude of other diseases that can kill you? Why aren't we getting weekly/daily/hourly testing done for TB, Influenza, RSV, Yellow Fever, Ebola, Malaria, pools, baseball bats, 9Vs (hook enough together, it'll certainly kill you!), buckets (infant drowning hazard), spider bites, alligators, pythons, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc et cetc ect etc etc etc etc?

Why is the ChinaVirus so special that it is the sole 'vaccine' that OSHA needs to attempt to force on everyone?
32 posted on 09/25/2021 9:59:20 PM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson