...I might just clarify, I was not referring to a cost:benefit analysis in my previous response, I was referring to the benefit:risk ratio. And health authorities around the globe continue to recommend the benefits-
The correct follow-up is "whose benefit and who bears the risk?" But that sounds like you're assuming they're acting in bad faith. Because their track record bears that out.
What would it take to force answers out of this evil? Why do they allow this? Theoretically there are lives at stake over the information they're hiding.
Nobody should be forced to incriminate themselves.
However they should be forced to take the 5th (or AU equivalent) and refuse to answer "on the grounds it may incriminate us". An evasive answer, eh, but these non-answers should at least be censured if not crimes.
On an unrelated note, who thinks it's reasonable for governments to use corporal punishment on subpeonaed witnesses who do not answer questions after three attempts during official inquiries?
No comment.
The correct follow-up is "whose benefit and who bears the risk?" But that sounds like you're assuming they're acting in bad faith. Because their track record bears that out.
The vaxxed can’t say they weren’t warned.
Retards on the internet were explaining the causes of this 2-3 years ago. Bullshit Pfizer doesn't know!
If you know someone who takes daily meds, have them read the pamphlets. Maybe it you, in which case, you should too.
You'd be surprised for how many meds "we don't know the mechanism by which [they] work[s]."
Never read that shit. You'll end up with every listed side effect before you take the first pill.
Lithium and the majority of psychiatric meds fall into this category.
Absolute.
Fucking.
Weasels.
This is worse than trying to get answers out of a politician.
Every time you don't answer the question directly you get a booster shot. Now explain why these shots are killing people..
What would it take to force answers out of this evil? Why do they allow this? Theoretically there are lives at stake over the information they're hiding.
Nobody should be forced to incriminate themselves.
However they should be forced to take the 5th (or AU equivalent) and refuse to answer "on the grounds it may incriminate us". An evasive answer, eh, but these non-answers should at least be censured if not crimes.
I don’t think we have an exact equivalent of the Fifth, but yeah…
There’s probably a similar mechanism in the law, but, IANAL, so I don’t know, tbh…
I don't hear anyone "admit" anything.
On an unrelated note, who thinks it's reasonable for governments to use corporal punishment on subpeonaed witnesses who do not answer questions after three attempts during official inquiries?