quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Makes me wonder when the real truth comes about about this, if all of the organizations that required vaccination will be liable for forcing employees or agents to get the poke.

It was configured drom the beginning to absolve all persons and entities of any legal responsibility. EUA means no liability. Employers following federal mandates.

Possibly the federal government will eventually have a bailout compensation. Paid for in large part by those who chose not to take the jabs because we were paying attention.

Steve Kirsch is pushing back against the FAA...

My email to the FAA leadership was ignored; are you surprised? I wasn't.
I thought you might enjoy reading this. I believe differences are best resolved through dialog, but they obviously don't agree. Cool. We can do it their way.
Steve Kirsch

First, if you work in the airline industry or the FAA and you haven’t yet signed my petition calling for an investigation, please do it now. The more signatures we have, the more leverage we have. Your names will not be disclosed without your consent. I want to get over 20,000 signatures.

Thanks to the thousands of signatures I now have, I just sent this email to the top FAA leadership telling them that if THEY fail to act, that THEY are jeopardizing the integrity of the nations air system.

They need to start an investigation as pointed out in the petition.

https://stevekirsch.substack.c...o-the-faa-leadership

Ok, I was wrong when I thought this was a satire piece, but it's REAL!!! Those who didn't get vaccinated are now being blamed for failing to warn those who did about side effects!!! You just can't make this stuff up!!!

They knew: why didn't the unvaccinated do more to warn us?

The unvaccinated knew what we didn't. Some of them said too little. Most said nothing at all. A lot of blood is now on their hands. As the world struggles to come to terms with the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, one question that continues to surface is why the unvaccinated didn't do more to warn us about the potential dangers of being injected. While well intending citizens lined up, did the right thing, and received their COVID19 vaccinations -- now seeming to do more harm than good -- their unvaccinated friends stood by and let them do it. Some of them said too little. Some said nothing at all.

Even though they knew what we didn't. Our blood is now on their hands.

Those are strong words. But the unvaccinated had access to important information about the potential side effects of vaccines. They knew about the risks of severe allergic reactions, blood clots, and other serious health complications. They knew that vaccines did not immunize us. They knew it wasn't effective, and that they can cause more harm than good.

They knew all of that, but instead of warning us, the unvaccinated chose to remain silent. They chose to look the other way and not speak out about the potential dangers of vaccines. They let millions of good folks who did the right thing (at the time) fall to death and disease, and many antivaxxers even gloated online about how their coin flip had been the right bet. The more diabolical even urged folks they disagree with to "get boosted."

It has become all too clear. The silence of the unvaccinated was a dangerous, sociopathic, and irresponsible decision that has had serious consequences for those of us who received the vaccinations. And silence is, after all, consent.

Related: How do we prevent discrimination against the vaccinated?

It is time for the unvaccinated to take responsibility for their actions and to work with the rest of us to find a solution to this crisis. We cannot afford to let their selfishness and lack of action continue to harm our communities. It is time for the unvaccinated to step up and do the right thing.

The unvaccinated should by any moral measuring stick have done more to warn about the potential risks -- to help us make informed decisions about our health. And they must now ask us for our forgiveness. And, hand to heart, we may just give it to them. Because we are good people. We took those injections because it was the right thing to do -- until it wasn't.

https://iqfy.com/unvaccinated-silence/

^^^ Is this even serious I wonder?
This article was pure gaslighting and they just want to divide people even more.

"You cannot be serious!"

These people are DELUSIONAL...And dangerously so!

When the jabbed demanded / accepted that the doctors and other experts who had licenses revoked or employment terminated or other unethical adverse effects when they voiced this information, did they say too little?

The truth is always out there. But you need to come out from mommy's apron to see it.

Fucking sheep - no personal accountability. Always blaming others for their failings. Talk to the hand, bitches.

I am dealing with the fact that after telling my daughter and her husband not to get the shot. That her brother who is a pharmacist advised against it because the new mRNA has not been tested or trialed. They went ahead and got it anyway…..but the really hard thing to take is my 10 yr old grandson was given it also….the day I heard this I cried. With all the information I was sending to them, I still could not convince them. I had my liberal ex and her husband who live close to them influencing them to get it.

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
Ok, I was wrong when I thought this was a satire piece, but it's REAL!!! Those who didn't get vaccinated are now being blamed for failing to warn those who did about side effects!!! You just can't make this stuff up!!!

They knew: why didn't the unvaccinated do more to warn us?

The unvaccinated knew what we didn't. Some of them said too little. Most said nothing at all. A lot of blood is now on their hands. As the world struggles to come to terms with the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, one question that continues to surface is why the unvaccinated didn't do more to warn us about the potential dangers of being injected. While well intending citizens lined up, did the right thing, and received their COVID19 vaccinations -- now seeming to do more harm than good -- their unvaccinated friends stood by and let them do it. Some of them said too little. Some said nothing at all.

Even though they knew what we didn't. Our blood is now on their hands.

Those are strong words. But the unvaccinated had access to important information about the potential side effects of vaccines. They knew about the risks of severe allergic reactions, blood clots, and other serious health complications. They knew that vaccines did not immunize us. They knew it wasn't effective, and that they can cause more harm than good.

They knew all of that, but instead of warning us, the unvaccinated chose to remain silent. They chose to look the other way and not speak out about the potential dangers of vaccines. They let millions of good folks who did the right thing (at the time) fall to death and disease, and many antivaxxers even gloated online about how their coin flip had been the right bet. The more diabolical even urged folks they disagree with to "get boosted."

It has become all too clear. The silence of the unvaccinated was a dangerous, sociopathic, and irresponsible decision that has had serious consequences for those of us who received the vaccinations. And silence is, after all, consent.

Related: How do we prevent discrimination against the vaccinated?

It is time for the unvaccinated to take responsibility for their actions and to work with the rest of us to find a solution to this crisis. We cannot afford to let their selfishness and lack of action continue to harm our communities. It is time for the unvaccinated to step up and do the right thing.

The unvaccinated should by any moral measuring stick have done more to warn about the potential risks -- to help us make informed decisions about our health. And they must now ask us for our forgiveness. And, hand to heart, we may just give it to them. Because we are good people. We took those injections because it was the right thing to do -- until it wasn't.

https://iqfy.com/unvaccinated-silence/

That opinion piece, I've got to believe, was written tongue-in-cheek. It contains elements designed to elicit an emotional response from (conservative) readers. I would have a difficult time believing that someone would be this obtuse. (Maybe I shouldn't be surprised; there seems to be an abundance of hysteria and obtuseness these days).

This is what followed the opinion piece:



"Sorry, commenting has been disabled.

While 85% of you are wonderful people and we'd love to hear from you (feel free to reach out at contact@IQfy.com or our @IQfy_ twitter!), the other 25% of recent comments have tended to be the result of targeted troll storms. Abuse from this vocal minority has traumatized our moderators and caused harm to the community.

Join the conversation

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
Ok, I was wrong when I thought this was a satire piece, but it's REAL!!!

Well, it's some kinda chick site (look at the articles: 9 reasons wine is better than a boyfriend and Is cuddling a form of cheating?) that describes itself with meaningless phrases. From their Twitter page: "IQfy is a non-partisan project working to elevate the conversation by designing and signal boosting smarter content."

Oh, they're gonna elevate the conversation. Right, right. "signal boosting" sounds so much more sophisticated than plain, clear language such as "featuring" or "publishing".

Now, that article has no author listed, so we can't check their other pieces. To me, it looks like master-level trolling. However, if that article was written and published by people who actually believe what it says, man, that is so freakin' sweet. It's just one loon, though (The Lone Loon- superhero) or a couple perhaps- author and editor, and it could be that they are the only people on the planet who believe this dreck, but it would be so beautiful if this tack continued, because what the article says, is insane.

So many sandwiches left unmade. Tragic

**edit**

Gotta be trolling: How do we prevent discrimination against the vaccinated?

This cannot be taken seriously and, to me, that's a shame.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by pulicords:



"Sorry, commenting has been disabled.

While 85% of you are wonderful people and we'd love to hear from you (feel free to reach out at contact@IQfy.com or our @IQfy_ twitter!), the other 25% of recent comments have tended to be the result of targeted troll storms. Abuse from this vocal minority has traumatized our moderators and caused harm to the community.

Join the conversation

It looks like they opened up the comments again. There are hundreds, if not thousands of comments blasting this article.

Awesome. Stupid should hurt.

Looks like they have disabled the comments again. I copied all of them and saved them to a file. I'm sure they will be deleted at some point.
If you go to their Twitter page, you can get a much better idea of who they represent .

I'm thinking now that this was all a ploy to drive traffic to that site.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I'm thinking now that this was all a ploy to drive traffic to that site.

I thought the same thing. Looks like it worked.
Just going to their Twitter site made me feel cheap.

^^^Seriously, NO need to scroll on their Twitter page AT ALL!

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^^Seriously, NO need to scroll on their Twitter page AT ALL!

Who said anything about scrolling?

No need. You'll get the big picture as soon as you arrive.

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...d-misinformation-law

California judge issues preliminary injunction blocking COVID ‘misinformation’ law: reports

Published January 25, 2023 9:47pm EST
By Greg Wehner | Fox News


A California judge issued a preliminary injunction against a state law that empowers the Medical Board of California to discipline physicians who support opinions about COVID-19 that are not in line with the "consensus," according to reports.

The law, known as Assembly Bill 2098, was set to take effect on Jan. 1, 2023. Under the law, the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California could discipline physicians who "disseminate" information about COVID that is not in line with the "contemporary scientific consensus."

But in November, a group of five California physicians filed a lawsuit against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration, saying the law violates their First Amendment rights and constitutional right to due process.

Aaron Kheriaty, MD, is listed as one of the physicians in the lawsuit, and on Wednesday he posted on Twitter that a judge granted their request for a preliminary injunction against AB 2098.

The preliminary injunction temporarily halts the implementation of the law while the case is tried in court.

"The ruling bodes well for our case," Kheriaty tweeted. "It indicates that our arguments that this law is unconstitutional have strong pre-trial facial plausibility. Not to get ahead of ourselves, of course, or try to predict the final outcome of the case, but this is a very positive development.

"One more detail here," he added. "The preliminary injunction ruling also establishes that we five physicians have standing to challenge the law. This is important because a similar challenge filed against AB2098 was dismissed based on a ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing."

The New Civil Liberties Alliance represent the doctors, or NCLA, which is a nonpartisan civil rights firm.

In November, Jenin Younes, counsel for the NCLA said California’s new "misinformation" law is the result of the increasing censorious mentality that has gripped many lawmakers in America.

"That this shocking bill passed through the state legislature and was signed into law by Governor Newsom demonstrates that far too many Americans do not understand the First Amendment," Younes said.

Doctors said the law violates their First Amendment rights because it impedes their ability to communicate with their patients during treatment.

"In safeguarding Americans’ rights to free speech and expression, the First Amendment applies not only to expression of majority opinions, but to minority views as well," the complaint said.

Doctors also argue that "contemporary scientific consensus" is "undefined in the law and undefinable as a matter of logic."

One plaintiff, Dr. Tracy Hoeg, wrote in the lawsuit that she is "afraid of saying something to my patients that I know is consistent with the current scientific literature but may not yet be accepted by the California Medical Board." Physicians must "feel free to speak truthfully with their patients if they wish to gain and maintain their trust," she said.

Hoeg has been the first, or senior, author of nine epidemiological analyses, six of which have been published in peer-reviewed journals on topics like the effectiveness of mask mandates and risk-benefit analysis of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in children. She said the California law "puts physicians who are simply trying to give appropriate and individualized recommendations in a difficult position, particularly considering they may not know what the California Medical Board’s ‘consensus’ is at the moment or if it also evolves as our understanding evolves."

Who the hell is Bill Gates to be the one determining who had an acceptable response to Covid and who did not? Oh yeah, the guy pandering to population reduction while spending money to attempt it. Fuck off Gates, you smug little asshole; you’re a rich guy, not a rich guy that gets to determine what’s best for humanity. POS.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/2...ndemic-response.html

Bill Gates says no country ‘gets an A’ for its Covid pandemic response—including the U.S.

Bill Gates says some of the world’s governments have handled the spread of Covid-19 better than others, but the billionaire won’t give any country a perfect mark.

“I wouldn’t say any country got it totally right,” Gates said in a recent interview at the Lowy Institute, a think tank in Sydney, Australia, adding: “Nobody ... gets an ‘A’ on this one.”

The Microsoft co-founder and health care philanthropist has both praised and criticized multiple world governments’ responses to the pandemic since the coronavirus’s initial spread in late 2019.

As early as March 2020, Gates argued that the U.S. “did not act fast enough” to take extreme quarantining measures, like shutting down businesses and issuing stay-at-home orders. He also said the country’s rollout of effective and accessible Covid tests was too slow.

The U.S. has proceeded to log a higher rate of Covid deaths per capita than any other of the world’s wealthiest nations since the start of the pandemic.

“In the future, countries need to have dedicated personnel, and they need to practice how they connect up with the PCR diagnostic industry,” Gates said on Monday.

Gates, who published a book last year called “How to Prevent the Next Pandemic,” said he expects federal governments across the world to make those responses much easier before the next global viral outbreak. Poor Covid responses inspired government spending on future pandemic preparedness in multiple countries, he observed.

Some Covid responses have been better than others, Gates argued. He cited Australia “and about 7 other countries,” which he did not publicly name, noting that Australia’s rate of Covid deaths per capita is still among the lowest in the world. It’s currently just 21% of the U.S.’s coronavirus death rate, according to Johns Hopkins University’s data.

The countries that drew Gates’s praise “did population-scale diagnostics early on, and had quarantine policies associated with that [which] kept the level of infection low,” he explained. Gates also applauded Australia’s pandemic response last year, noting that the country quickly closed its international borders in March 2020.

The U.S. received high marks from Gates in one category: spending more than $30 billion to fund the research and development for coronavirus vaccines. The U.S. gave that money to companies in multiple countries, resulting in multiple effective Covid vaccines.

Gates’s advocacy for strong pandemic preparation isn’t new. In a 2015 TED Talk, he warned that an infectious virus could pose greater risk to the world’s population than nuclear war.

Yet on Monday, he said he wasn’t entirely surprised by the world’s relatively sluggish response to Covid’s spread: “Pandemics come along so rarely that it’s easy to be incompetent.”

Pandemic preparedness budgets in the U.S. were repeatedly cut in the decade leading up to 2020. In Gates’s ideal scenario, that won’t happen again in the U.S. or anywhere else.

Each five years, governments should run a “really comprehensive exercise at both country and regional levels” with groups like the World Health Organization to prepare for potential quarantining and diagnostics measures, Gates said.

“Epidemics, hopefully this will get us to take them seriously, at least for the next 20 or 30 years,” he added.

Reuters taking a swing at fact-checking the IQFY article. They're saying it's an altered article and the author denies writing the piece:

https://www.reuters.com/articl...accine-idUSL1N3491WD

Reuters Fact Check
January 24, 202312:56 PMUpdated 2 days ago
Fact Check-Fake headline from The Conversation asks why the unvaccinated didn’t ‘warn’ the vaccinated

By Reuters Fact Check

4 Min Read

A screenshot purporting to show a future headline for an article published by The Conversation asks why the “unvaccinated did not do more to warn” people who were inoculated with a COVID-19 vaccine, but it is fabricated.

The Conversation is a website that publishes articles written by academics and edited by journalists. The publication’s logo is visible at the top left corner of the fake screenshot, with a headline that reads: “THEY KNEW: Why didn’t the unvaccinated do more to warn us?”

The circulated screenshot is dated June 6, 2023, five months in the future at the time of this writing.

In the image, a cover graphic features cartoon figures, with two in medical attire holding vaccines while the other two figures can be seen holding hands toward the medical personnel in a gesture of rejection.

The opening paragraph visible across the lower third of the screenshot reads: “While well intending citizens lined up, did the right thing, and received their COVID19 vaccinations, now known to do more harm than good, their unvaccinated friends and family stood by and let them do it. Even though they knew what we didn’t. Some of them said too little. Some said nothing at all. Our blood is now on their hands.”

Examples of the screenshot can be viewed (here), (here).

No such headline is viewable, however, when searching through the website’s content (archive.is/wip/78kDA).

No such article has been produced for later publication either, according to the author named in the fake screenshot. Alessandro Siani, associate head of the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Portsmouth in Britain, told Reuters that he has not penned any such headline or article, and the screenshot circulating online is fabricated.

Siani did author an article published by The Conversation on Jan. 6, 2023, which features identical illustration, but whose real headline reads: “COVID: unvaccinated people may be seen as ‘free riders’ and face discrimination” (here).

“As a scientist, I firmly believe that vaccinations (including those against COVID-19) are an essential preventive measure, and that their effectiveness in preventing transmissible diseases largely outweighs any rare unwanted effects associated with their use,” Siani told Reuters.

Siani has also flagged the fake headline via his LinkedIn feed (bit.ly/3R5bYr6).

The authentic article published in The Conversation discussed discrimination and attitudes toward unvaccinated people in various countries, based on a study published in the journal Nature in early December (here).

Siani’s own research publications can be viewed (here), (here).

The Conversation also tweeted to confirm that the circulating screenshot is fabricated, and provided a link to the authentic January article by Siani (here), archived (archive.is/wip/pU6Lz).
VERDICT

Altered. An article penned by an academic at the University of Portsmouth on potential discrimination faced by unvaccinated people was altered to include a fake headline, text and date.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here.

This is a reasonably balanced article. It is too long to copy and paste.


The Epidemic of #DiedSuddenly

Why is the public turning to a single, ominous explanation for tragedies like Damar Hamlin’s collapse? Two doctors explain.

https://www.thefp.com/p/the-epidemic-of-diedsuddenly