Covid vaccine - opinions?

[tented]

Nothing to see here:

This is not real. News programs do not open like this.

 

[El Dude]

This is not real. News programs do not open like this.

But it is. The maker of the video compiled the clips from here:

Internet Archive TV NEWS : Search Captions. Borrow Broadcasts

Welcome to Internet Archive TV News! This research library service enables you to: Search more than 2,877,000 U.S. broadcasts using closed captioning; Borrow broadcasts on DVDs; View and Cite short streamed clips; Compare and Contrast perspectives across networks, stations and time; and Place...

archive.org

 

[tented]

But it is. The maker of the video compiled the clips from here:

Internet Archive TV NEWS : Search Captions. Borrow Broadcasts

Welcome to Internet Archive TV News! This research library service enables you to: Search more than 2,877,000 U.S. broadcasts using closed captioning; Borrow broadcasts on DVDs; View and Cite short streamed clips; Compare and Contrast perspectives across networks, stations and time; and Place...

archive.org

If you take that link, you get a list of tv programs which have used the phrase “sponsored by Pfizer”. Here it is:

Now, if you watch that clip you linked to, it mentioned many programs which are not listed here: Anderson Cooper 360, Nightline, Making a Difference, CNN Tonight, Early Start, Erin Burnett Out Front, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, CBS Sports. That’s eight programs which your source doesn’t even cite. Why not?

And from your own memory, as you’ve watched the news, can you recall seeing this kind of intro with “Sponsored by Pfizer”? When? How many times? The video you sent would have us believe it’s ubiquitous.

Also, if you look closely at the text from which that site found examples of that phrase, you also get instances of people quoting drug studies in the context of covid, i.e., “the study was sponsored by Pfizer.”

The YouTube clip you linked to would also make it seem as if 60 Minutes Overtime was always opening that way. But here are the most recent examples of that segment, none open with “sponsored by Pfizer:

 

[Front242]

^ Pfizer do a lot of self-promoting bs. No shit, the manufacturers say it's safe so it must be! I mean they have no conflict of interest lol. If people want to trust them, that's up to them.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pfi...SAQc2LjEuMC4xmAEAoAEByAEEwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz

But then again, maybe you shouldn't....

https://www.google.com/search?q=pfi...RkgEGMTcuNC4xmAEAoAEByAEFwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz

 

[Front242]

Sounds like a rhetorical question, Britbox! I mean, could it be gradual depopulation through chemical sterilization? Just maybe?

It is really starting to seem like the biggest conspiracy theory is the one promulgated by the media for their elite overlords. It is almost as if the last two years has upended the whole thing, yet any dissent is considered "conspiracy theory" by the mainstream media brainwashed masses. I think of Jacinda Arden's very telling statement, "Don't trust anyone but us for information" - or however she put it.

As for the medical industry, I've been helping care for my elderly father who has a variety of health issues and is on a ton of meds. I am struck by how none of his many doctors say anything about diet or lifestyle: just do our treatments, take our meds. It is a sickness industry. I mean, it isn't that I don't think his doctors care about him, but that they're so embedded within their own paradigm that they ignore basic things like nutrition, self-care, even drinking water. It is an industry of pushing pharmaceuticals and expensive treatments that perpetuates itself, and seems built to keep people sick and therefore on their drugs and dependent upon the system.

While the vax thing has been politicized so that most see it as a left-right thing, and most of my lefty friends think anti-vaxxers are all Republicans and/or Christians and/or alt-right conspiracy theorists, what they ignore is that a lot of the resistance is from the counter-culture left and natural health community: those who believe in natural immunity, self-healing, etc. Meaning, those that take their health into their own hands, and don't want to rely upon an outside authority or endless medical interventions.

There's a lot of people leaning towards this being the idea alright, that is chemical sterilization. That's why any parent giving their kids this crap when they aren't even at risk one bit doesn't deserve to be a parent.

 

[tented]

^ Pfizer do a lot of self-promoting bs. No shit, the manufactureres say it's safe so it must be! I mean they have no conflict of interest lol. If people want to trust them, that's up to them.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pfi...SAQc2LjEuMC4xmAEAoAEByAEEwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz

But then again, maybe you shouldn't....

https://www.google.com/search?q=pfi...RkgEGMTcuNC4xmAEAoAEByAEFwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz

That’s not at all relevant to my post, or the video El Dude posted.

 

[Front242]

That’s not at all relevant to my post, or the video El Dude posted.

I think you'll find it is and relates to this part you posted:

"Also, if you look closely at the text from which that site found examples of that phrase, you also get instances of people quoting drug studies in the context of covid, i.e., “the study was sponsored by Pfizer.”

They promote their own bs products by claiming they're safe.

 

[Front242]

Watch and learn about supposed "vaccine misinformation" and who is behind the corrupt www.factcheck.org paid to push their agenda/narrative to the blind sheeple. They do a good job it must be said.



And this one...



This was never about health, only money...

 

[tented]

I think you'll find it is and relates to this part you posted:

"Also, if you look closely at the text from which that site found examples of that phrase, you also get instances of people quoting drug studies in the context of covid, i.e., “the study was sponsored by Pfizer.”

They promote their own bs products by claiming they're safe.

No, it doesn’t relate to that at all. The part you’re quoting is in reference to newscasters discussing studies about covid which were done by Pfizer and other drug companies. That’s different to opening a news program with “Tonight’s News from Tented, Sponsored by Pfizer.”

 

[El Dude]

@tented , I haven't scanned through every clip on that page to see if they match, but I have seen tons of news shows in the past--not to mention NPR--that say "sponsored by X pharma company." I don't really watch mainstream news, so don't know if this is true recently.

But the conflict of interest is obviously there. And we don't even have to get into the CDC, FDA, and big pharma swapping around executives and board members.

 

[tented]

Here he is with the same old faces.

Who else do we have? Good ole Ted Turner, the founder of CNN

This photo comes from this Tweet:


Note the wording: “WOW: A high-level source just sent me this photo, says that it shows Dr. FAUCI with George SOROS and Bill Gates' father among others. Source says it's from 2001. Fauci identified as man third from the left”

Why would there be an element of surprise? Why would it need to be phrased that a “high-level source … says that it shows Dr. FAUCI”? Why would the source need to supply the date? As if all of this was some super secret event. It wasn’t. It’s based on a photo from a Carnegie Medals of Philanthropy ceremony in New York in 2001. The actual images were taken by press photographers, and the rights are owned by Getty Images and Alamy— two standard image copyright owners — and none include Dr. Fauci. If you search for this event, you will not find this photo, except on right-wing Twitter accounts and blogs. And note that the other photos tweeted depicting this event have a Getty watermark (see below). Why doesn’t this one? And why is Fauci the only one looking directly at the camera? It makes him conveniently easily identifiable. Couldn’t this have been done with Photoshop?

 

[tented]

@tented , I haven't scanned through every clip on that page to see if they match, but I have seen tons of news shows in the past--not to mention NPR--that say "sponsored by X pharma company." I don't really watch mainstream news, so don't know if this is true recently.

But the conflict of interest is obviously there. And we don't even have to get into the CDC, FDA, and big pharma swapping around executives and board members.

I suggest looking deeper into such videos, instead of just implicitly trusting them. There are a lot of deep fakes out there now.

 

[britbox]

This photo comes from this Tweet:


Note the wording: “WOW: A high-level source just sent me this photo, says that it shows Dr. FAUCI with George SOROS and Bill Gates' father among others. Source says it's from 2001. Fauci identified as man third from the left”

Why would there be an element of surprise? Why would it need to be phrased that a “high-level source … says that it shows Dr. FAUCI”? Why would the source need to supply the date? As if all of this was some super secret event. It wasn’t. It’s based on a photo from a Carnegie Medals of Philanthropy ceremony in New York in 2001. The actual images were taken by press photographers, and the rights are owned by Getty Images and Alamy— two standard image copyright owners — and none include Dr. Fauci. If you search for this event, you will not find this photo, except on right-wing Twitter accounts and blogs. And note that the other photos tweeted depicting this event have a Getty watermark (see below). Why doesn’t this one? And why is Fauci the only one looking directly at the camera? It makes him conveniently easily identifiable. Couldn’t this have been done with Photoshop?

The photo was taken.

Here is the original.

and it was also in this newsletter.

https://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/library/2002-06-01-Anthony-Fauci-biographical-profile-Summer-2002-Vol-36-No-03-by-Donald-NS-Unger-Holy-Cross-Magazine-Jun-01-2002.pdf

Fauci was a presenter at the event.

First Andrew Carnegie Medals Awarded to Seven Visionaries of Modern Philanthropy | Carnegie Corporation of New York

Medals Commemorate the Centennial of Carnegie's Retirement and Beginning of His Full Time Philanthropic Career

www.carnegie.org

 

[britbox]

I suggest looking deeper into such videos, instead of just implicitly trusting them. There are a lot of deep fakes out there now.

That is true, but there are plenty of Government and "trusted news source" videos circulating that are also deep fakes / CGI. You have to question what is actually real. Even better to just turn of the TV. Mainstream media is little more than a programming tool manned by puppet actors.

 

[britbox]

That aside, the point is that these groups are not serving any interests other than their own. Constant Divide and Conquer philosophies being rammed down peoples throats 24/7.

 

[tented]

The photo was taken.

Here is the original.

View attachment 5574

and it was also in this newsletter.

https://www.fbcoverup.com/docs/library/2002-06-01-Anthony-Fauci-biographical-profile-Summer-2002-Vol-36-No-03-by-Donald-NS-Unger-Holy-Cross-Magazine-Jun-01-2002.pdf

Fauci was a presenter at the event.

First Andrew Carnegie Medals Awarded to Seven Visionaries of Modern Philanthropy | Carnegie Corporation of New York

Medals Commemorate the Centennial of Carnegie's Retirement and Beginning of His Full Time Philanthropic Career

www.carnegie.org

I was wrong. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Moxie]

@tented , I haven't scanned through every clip on that page to see if they match, but I have seen tons of news shows in the past--not to mention NPR--that say "sponsored by X pharma company." I don't really watch mainstream news, so don't know if this is true recently.

But the conflict of interest is obviously there. And we don't even have to get into the CDC, FDA, and big pharma swapping around executives and board members.

I looked up a couple of lists of NPR sponsors, (latest was for 2019, that I found,) and I found no big pharma companies on them. Lots of investment firms and health insurance companies, etc. But if you listen to NPR, and most journalistic ventures of an credibility, when they do a story that involves someone who sponsors them, they note it within the piece. Here is a list of NPR corporate sponsors...it's at the end of the report: https://media.npr.org/documents/about/annualreports/2019_Annual_Report.pdf

 

[britbox]

I looked up a couple of lists of NPR sponsors, (latest was for 2019, that I found,) and I found no big pharma companies on them. Lots of investment firms and health insurance companies, etc. But if you listen to NPR, and most journalistic ventures of an credibility, when they do a story that involves someone who sponsors them, they note it within the piece. Here is a list of NPR corporate sponsors...it's at the end of the report: https://media.npr.org/documents/about/annualreports/2019_Annual_Report.pdf

Moxie, out of interest, what defines a "journalistic venture of an credibility"? Can you provide an example?

 

[Moxie]

As for the medical industry, I've been helping care for my elderly father who has a variety of health issues and is on a ton of meds. I am struck by how none of his many doctors say anything about diet or lifestyle: just do our treatments, take our meds. It is a sickness industry. I mean, it isn't that I don't think his doctors care about him, but that they're so embedded within their own paradigm that they ignore basic things like nutrition, self-care, even drinking water. It is an industry of pushing pharmaceuticals and expensive treatments that perpetuates itself, and seems built to keep people sick and therefore on their drugs and dependent upon the system.

While the vax thing has been politicized so that most see it as a left-right thing, and most of my lefty friends think anti-vaxxers are all Republicans and/or Christians and/or alt-right conspiracy theorists, what they ignore is that a lot of the resistance is from the counter-culture left and natural health community: those who believe in natural immunity, self-healing, etc. Meaning, those that take their health into their own hands, and don't want to rely upon an outside authority or endless medical interventions.

I definitely agree that the medical industry in this country is not holistic or open-minded about alternative therapies, and is heavily medication-based.

I'm surprised that anyone should think that those who are anti-vaccination, or vaccination-hesitant are all coming from the right. I would say those that are affected by the politicization of it are. The anti-vaccination movement, however, long predates Covid and Trump. It certainly includes lefties and all sorts. But it isn't merely a matter of believing in natural immunity and self-healing. There has been a whole segment of that group that, through misinformation, has been refusing to vaccinate their children. I don't see this, (nor most other various anti-vaccination stances) as so much not wanting to "rely upon an outside authority or endless medical interventions," so much as being misinformed. A vaccination isn't an "endless medical intervention," for one. And while I do think that everyone needs to take responsibility for their own health, to be actively informed about it, and open alternative therapies and medicines, I think the notion of harm in any vaccination wildly overstated. I really don't think people get to decide that they believe in "self-healing" in a pandemic, meaning a very infectious illness.

 

[Front242]

Boosters just 6 months after 2 shots and then another booster after 6 months and another after 6 months, rinse and repeat! Sure seems like endless medical intervention to me! Get it together with the flu jab as a combo meal!