I'd have to have planned this out a long time then, I made that post months ago. Myocarditis was first reported in April 21.
Yeah, back then you were panicking about AstraZeneca (and a curfew for men), which you are conveniently not mentioning here. You also said that AZ was 'created by women to kill men', and claimed that women would be exempted from taking it.
But for some reason, their evil plan was foiled. Drats! Ursula von der Leyen did not ask the ECB to force every country to use AstraZeneca.
That's true, but making profit off your enemy's success makes you a traitor, surely.
Not particularly. Nor is Pfizer my enemy, any more than any other big company. They're pretty much all evil.
I was right that there was a vaccine created by women which harmed men more. I just bet on the wrong name. I knew when all our enemies praised something, it was a bad thing.
As you may recall, I pivoted from AZ to PFE when myocarditis was beginning to come out.
From there I settled on the CDC Director as being the reason, but the PV expose came out and inadvertently showed how many of the upper ranks at PFE are feminists. From there I found the lead scientist was a dangerhair and it all made sense.
Well, that's a weird moral stance. Profiting from your enemy winning means that you are on their side, you want them to succeed.
I was right that there was a vaccine created by women which harmed men more.
What next, they invented peanut butter as well, to kill boys with a peanut allergy? All kidding aside, the issue is not that "it harmed men more", but that you claimed it as an intent.
Hell, the craziest thing is not even that you believe this was their intent. The craziest thing is that you think they have the technical know-how to accomplish that.
I just bet on the wrong name. I knew when all our enemies praised something, it was a bad thing.
Basically everyone with sense is praising the vaccine, because it does do a great amount of good. The issue is whether you should give it to people who are at basicalkly no risk. I say no.
As you may recall, I pivoted from AZ to PFE when myocarditis was beginning to come out.
It was AZ that was advertised as "INVENTED BY A WOMAN", which immediately mad you think that it was a weapon of genocide.e
From there I found the lead scientist was a dangerhair and it all made sense.
What? Please link, I don't know about this.
Well, that's a weird moral stance. Profiting from your enemy winning means that you are on their side, you want them to succeed.
Not at all. I can have no influence on their success.
The craziest thing is that you think they have the technical know-how to accomplish that.
Anything is achievable when your target is significantly biologically different to yourself.
It's why the whole Jews vs "goyim" argument never worked. There isn't enough biological differences between Ashkenazi Jews and everyone else to make it possible to target the other and protect their own.
I'd have to have planned this out a long time then, I made that post months ago. Myocarditis was first reported in April 21.
That's true, but making profit off your enemy's success makes you a traitor, surely.
If I was going to war with China, I wouldn't own Tencent shares.
Yeah, back then you were panicking about AstraZeneca (and a curfew for men), which you are conveniently not mentioning here. You also said that AZ was 'created by women to kill men', and claimed that women would be exempted from taking it.
But for some reason, their evil plan was foiled. Drats! Ursula von der Leyen did not ask the ECB to force every country to use AstraZeneca.
Not particularly. Nor is Pfizer my enemy, any more than any other big company. They're pretty much all evil.
I was right that there was a vaccine created by women which harmed men more. I just bet on the wrong name. I knew when all our enemies praised something, it was a bad thing.
As you may recall, I pivoted from AZ to PFE when myocarditis was beginning to come out.
From there I settled on the CDC Director as being the reason, but the PV expose came out and inadvertently showed how many of the upper ranks at PFE are feminists. From there I found the lead scientist was a dangerhair and it all made sense.
Well, that's a weird moral stance. Profiting from your enemy winning means that you are on their side, you want them to succeed.
What next, they invented peanut butter as well, to kill boys with a peanut allergy? All kidding aside, the issue is not that "it harmed men more", but that you claimed it as an intent.
Hell, the craziest thing is not even that you believe this was their intent. The craziest thing is that you think they have the technical know-how to accomplish that.
Basically everyone with sense is praising the vaccine, because it does do a great amount of good. The issue is whether you should give it to people who are at basicalkly no risk. I say no.
It was AZ that was advertised as "INVENTED BY A WOMAN", which immediately mad you think that it was a weapon of genocide.e
What? Please link, I don't know about this.
Not at all. I can have no influence on their success.
https://communities.win/c/TheDonald/p/140J1HSiqU/happy-international-mens-day-to-/c
It's my top post of all time.
Anything is achievable when your target is significantly biologically different to yourself.
It's why the whole Jews vs "goyim" argument never worked. There isn't enough biological differences between Ashkenazi Jews and everyone else to make it possible to target the other and protect their own.