CDC, big pharma scrambling to take back control of narrative as facts and admissions hinder COVID-19 agenda

So we are told the vaccine stops the spread then told they don’t.

This level of doublethink is proof this is all a scam.

Cada vez más vacunas letales cuando existen productos excelentes para prevenir y tratar el covid como el dióxido de cloro que increíblemente está prohibido.

This is another really well written article, however I have a different outlook as pertains to the PCR testing emergency use revocation, that assesses this matter from the viewpoint of the reptile-brained munchkin and his accomplishes running this show –

A July 21 CDC bulletin said that the organization is withdrawing its emergency use authorization for PCR testing, effective December 31, 2021.

Thus the PCR tests that have been used since February 2020 cannot tell the difference between the novel coronavirus and influenza.

I think that you need to consider this from a two-pronged baseline – the Fauci-ites essentially need two things –

1) They need a continued ‘battle royale’ distraction in which the general population is whipped to frenzy over vaccination status and encouraged to fight one another into exhaustion, without which, the focus would return to Fauci / Daszak et al, and the roles that they had in relation to Viral development.

2) They need ‘vaccine’ mandates to propagate in private industry and academia, for multiple reasons – A) including, the above mentioned conflict that deflects attention from their own actions, B) wiping out the pool of unvaccinated / naturally immune for outcome comparisons once the ‘booster shots’ start being mandated for the experimental test subjects, C) long-term negative outcomes cannot be traced back to experimental injections since everyone will have had at least one shot, and D) the naturally immune are all rolled into the pool of artificial injectees, to offer a false appearance of efficacy and immunity for the S.P. vax.

The legal hand that the Fauci-ites are holding is actually a lot weaker than it is being sold in mass media, and when deceptive fraudsters are holding a bad hand, they can be relied on to attempt to bluff their way out of it because the norm for these sort is to assume that everyone else is a dupe or mark who can be ‘rolled’.

I was reading up on the Indiana U anti-mandate suit going to the Supreme Court, and while I hope that it prevails as is, it appears from media descriptions to only argue a religious exemption case, which is actually NOT the strongest argument.

The strongest argument would be to include a plaintiff who is recovered from Covid and has lab testing to prove current immunity, along with the religious exemption argument..

My personal example – I have full immunity from the Hep B virus, and when I have worked in certain jobs, the hiring process always required that you FIRST be medically tested for existing Hep B immunity. If the blood test shows that you do not have Hep B immunity, you must then take the Hep B vaccine to be eligible for employment, as required for certain LE, Fire Dept, EMT or other Medical jobs. I am NOT required to take the Hep B vaccine, because I already demonstrate immunity in a blood test for the virus. No one asks me to provide a CDC-issued vax card to prove that I am already inoculated against Hep B, they simply pull a laboratory blood test on each such instance, and it returns a result, each time, indicating that I have acquired viral immunity from Hep B (which lasts a lifetime).

When this type of ‘compulsory vaccination of the immune’ scheme eventually gets its day in court, it should be argued/judged in part on past practices in similar medical circumstances. Pretending that natural or post-infection immunity does not exist will not work for them, and ‘past practices’ are also against them, as demonstrated in my personal viral example above – forcing people to get an experimental injection at penalty of job / income loss, when immune, does not meet the basic standards of medical ethics anymore than it would if I was forced to accept a Hep B vaccination every time that I took a new job, despite blood testing showing full immunity. 

I suspect that the casting of doubts on Covid diagnostic testing reliability could be a throw-away tactic designed to support a claim that, since no one can allegedly tell who has had Covid, everyone still needs to take the experimental injection due to the new-found, o-so unfortunate, unreliability of testing. There is genuine concern over where the diagnostic cutoff cycle count should be, but that does not make PCR or other testing processes useless or even unreliable in more conservative cycle count confidence intervals.

If you notice in the CDC link to FDA approved tests,under ‘Serology/Antibody and Other Adaptive Immune Response Tests’ (the section relating to antibodies-T/B cell immunity testing) it is little more that templates for potential test developers. They lose nothing by tossing out the PCR diagnostic test because a lot of other options are available, but gain a claim that all the previous testing for those who claim acquired immunity is now unreliable and it hopefully becomes tainted when used by plaintiffs fighting injection mandates on the grounds of prior infection/recovery..

The blunt object, last-ditch weapon in the arsenal of the vaccine mandaters is thus to deny that historical testing works, and thus the only option is to vaccinate everyone with their sacred injections.  For those of us who are generally honest, it is hard to interdict the thought processes of international criminals involved in mass deaths across the planet, but “beware of stranger bearing gifts” seems pertinent here..

Rather die from the fake man made disease than die from the fake man made cure.