all 19 comments

[–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

Do you think they saw this headline?.

Edit:.

‘Repetition of information, even if false, can often be mistaken for accuracy.’.

This is the fundamental strategy of the vaccine program.

"Vaccines are safe, and effective."
"Vaccines are safe, and effective."

"Vaccines are safe, and effective."
"Vaccines are safe, and effective."
"Vaccines are safe, and effective."

The world is waking up. The public is winning the information war.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

That site actually has well-researched information. This is concerning, because you might actually have a point.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

My friend, the information is suppressed so it's difficult to find if you don't know where to look. Well intentioned doctors have been mislead.

Billions of dollars have been paid out in damages. Billions!!!? That's an epidemic type money.

On top of that, the families are ordered into silence if they accept the compensation, so the public is unaware of the facts.

The truth is just getting to the public. That is why Facebook and Google are being pressured.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

On top of that, the families are ordered into silence if they accept the compensation, so the public is unaware of the facts.

Source?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Not the same, but relevant. Still looking, cause they bury this info. (https://www.ageofautism.com/.m/2017/09/cdc-tells-their-employees-to-stop-talking.html)

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

If "they bury this info" then how did you find about it in the first place? See if you can find that (the Internet Archive and Google Cache and stuff might help).

The CDC being generally secretive doesn't mean that they're suppressing information; there might be good reason for the former.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Podcasts from days of yore.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

And where did those get it from? I'd expect that there was a family who took the money and then said something, if you're right – how would that be enforced, anyway? Would they go "we paid them to keep a" – no, I can't see how that'd work.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

And where did those get it from? I'd expect that there was a family who took the money and then said something, if you're right – how would that be enforced, anyway?

A judge can issue a gag order, or terms can be included in settlements, etc.. This a fairly common occurrence. It is surprising that you've never heard of this. For example: Trump's lawyer had a similar arrangement with Stormy Daniels. She deliberated for some time about the consequences; in spite of elite support from the political establishment.

Would they go "we paid them to keep a" – no, I can't see how that'd work.

I'm guessing you now can see how it can work. There are many potential outcomes.

Keep in mind that Stormy Daniels reluctantly broke the terms; with tremendous political, media, legal, and economic support. A vaccine injured family would have no media support (so the public never sees the facts), or public support, or political support.

On top of this, they are guaranteed to incur years/decades of legal maneuverings against the combined legal armies of big pharma, and the state...

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

So if they revealed it, then the CDC would… publicise it further? Thus invoking the Streisand effect? That seems stupid.

I notice that I am confused.

Therefore, something I believe must be false.

I don't think your theory holds. It doesn't seem right. I'm not believing it until I've got a source; only then will I be able to follow it up properly.

[–]Alduin 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So they want Facebook and Google to determine what's true and what isn't about the world around us, and shield us from non-compliant thinking. I can't possibly see any flaws in this plan.