Sunday, December 19, 2021

War on Words, part V

"Keep distant from false words -- מדבר שקר תרחק"

Exodus 23:7

Let's stop using their fabricated terminologies that lend credence to their fake narrative. I’ve addressed this disturbing phenomenon years ago with regards to media bias [1], but sadly failed to identify it for the past two years of intense state/media/medical-establishment indoctrination. The words they use – and that we subsequently adopt in casual speech – are subliminally affirming their carefully-spun web of lies, deception, and incitement. Our language has been assaulted and hijacked. It's time to take back the narrative.

For example, every time we say "COVID," we unwittingly acknowledge the existence of a "Corona Virus Disease," that this dreaded medical condition is actually caused by a corona virus.

Likewise, whenever we say "SARS CoV2," we acknowledge that a novel “corona virus” causes a "severe acute respiratory syndrome."

This claim is unsubstantiated and un-scientific, as no empirical evidence exists that a so-called corona virus causes any disease or syndrome altogether.

Instead, we might refer to the alleged pathogen of their alleged pandemic (since "pandemic" is likewise an arbitrary claim that is not corroborated by facts).

Actually, the notion that any "virus" is pathogenic is just a theory, not a fact. The very existence of "viruses" (by their definition) is unsubstantiated.

"Immunization" is likewise a myth, as no lasting immunity is conferred by any vaccine. Speaking of which, "vaccine" is a nebulous term that should be avoided as well, since it's confusing semantics that dubiously equates this novel gene therapy with traditional "vaccines" of the past.

Stop referring to people as “vaccinated” or “unvaccinated” for the same reason. Moreover, the latter term is disparaging and suggests that a person who wisely declined this dubious injection is somehow missing something. Worst of all, these toxic terms are part of the establishment’s dangerously divisive rhetoric that create apartheid divisions in our population separating between the “have’s” and “have-not’s.”

Avoid the term "booster" as well. Where is the science that this injection "boosts" anything? It's actually quite the opposite: evidence suggests that it suppresses the immune system.

Stop calling it a PCR test. It doesn’t “test” anything and was never intended to be diagnostic. It’s good for purely speculative genetic research.

Please don’t say “safe social distancing.” Where is the evidence that distancing makes anyone safe? If anything, it makes people less safe and more vulnerable to loneliness, hunger, apathy, and tyranny.

And the most absurd term of all is "Public Health Policy" LOL. Since when did any of their policies make anyone healthy? If anything, these policies have sickened the public, causing autoimmunity, injury, paralysis, sterility, and death. “Public Unhealth” is more accurate.

It's high time we avoid their agenda-driven, deliberately misleading terminology and insist on semantic accuracy. 

In summary, here are the dubious terms to avoid:

Sunday, December 5, 2021

A \/accine Indeed

Yes! It's a \/accine!
By Rabbi Michoel Green [1]

Some scientists argue that calling the covid shot a "vaksine" is an insult to vaksines everywhere.
They maintain that it’s NOT a vaksene but a gene experiment and device implant. The only reason it’s being referred to as a vakseen is to mislead the unsuspecting public and whitewash the significant risks of this high-tech medical procedure. To them, this new injection is a “vakscene in name only.”
With all due respect, I humbly disagree.
If the CDC insists on calling it a vaqscene, then so be it. A vackseen it is.
In fact, this vacqscene now sheds light on all other vakksines from which it derives.
Our sages taught:
"Anything which was subsumed in a general category, and came out from that category to teach (something) — not in order to teach about itself did it come out, but in order to teach about the entire category did it emerge.” [2]
In our case, the lesson is quite obvious. If their definitions are correct, then this pharmaceutical product was once subsumed in the general category of CDC-recommended vaccines, but has distinctly emerged from that category in a most salient and dramatic way:
1. It is now the deadliest quacksine in history, approximately sixty times deadlier than all quackseens in the past 22 years combined [3]. Unprecedented numbers of injuries are being reported as well, including blood clot, paralysis, tremors, seizures, tinnitus, still birth, miscarriage, etc.
2. This vaqsine has been made possible by widespread deception of state, media, and the medical mainstream. Dissenting views of expert scientists have been suppressed and censored. Risks of this experimental product have been hidden from the public.
3. State and corporate enforcement of this whackscene represents a remarkably unprecedented violation of HIPAA laws, Nuremberg Code, and individual rights.
4. Remarkably, this quackedscene is being pushed on individuals for whom the actual disease poses virtually zero risk. Parents are being urged to jeopardize their child's life and health ONLY for the sake of some alleged societal benefit.
5. People everywhere are waking up to the reality that a covid whackseen mandate is unjust. Unprecedented numbers of Americans are now identifying as "waxscene hesitant."
Employing the above-cited hermeneutic principle, we may conclude that this product has not emerged from the general category of whacksines “only in order to teach about itself” but rather to teach about the ENTIRE category from whence it so derives:
1. All quackscenes involve significant risk of death and lifelong injury.
2. All whackscenes have been made possible by deception, suppression, and censorship.
3. All whackseen mandates are inherently unjust, unconstitutional, unethical, morally reprehensible, and intolerable in a free society. Quackscene mandates are obscene.
4. NO vackscene was ever necessary your child. It was always about satisfying some dubious state agenda.
5. It's okay to decline the covid waxcine, and likewise it's PERFECTLY reasonable to decline ANY waxscene. In fact, it's just common sense.
Many thanks to the CDC for calling this injection what it truly is, a quackscene much like all other quackscenes, and making this all so abundantly clear. Well done.

[1] This article was originally posted to my alter-ego blog -- -- back on May 24, 2021, after Blogger started censoring my posts. Please pardon the deliberate misspellings... I was trying to stay under the censorship radar.

[2] Sifra, Beraita of Rabbi Yishmael, number eight of the thirteen exegetic principles through which the Torah is expounded: “כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא מן הכלל ללמד, לא ללמד על עצמו יצא, אלא ללמד על הכלל כולו יצא”. According to tradition, this teaching is recited daily before the morning liturgy.
[3] Based on VAERS reports of 4,571 deaths after vacksines throughout 22 years, from January 1st, 1999 until November 30th, 2020, i.e. 56 deaths per day on average, versus 4,647 deaths after the covid vaqseens from December 14, 2020 through May 17, 2021, averaging 30 deaths per day. This is roughly a 60:1 ratio. Given the extraordinary state and corporate efforts to cover up the lethality of this injection, is reasonable to assume that deaths following the covid vakkscenes are highly under-reported, more so than VAERS reports of the past 22 years.