Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.0K

Wouldn't it be a perfect cover?

Without knowing someones vax status, any NGO, or government, could kill anyone, and then spread rumors they were vaxed all while officially denying vaxes kill anyone--loudly and conspicuously.

And we'd all be lead to believe it was the vax.

The athlete deaths and other conspicuous deaths would be a trial run for this method.

They could kill entire towns of people if they wanted, use cartels, or units of the military, freshly staffed with illegals. Do it by night, blackout communications, and kill or round up dissidents.

How would you prove you aren't vaccinated when government records can be altered to say you are? "Oh, turns out some batches were HOT! Now we're seeing large scale deaths. Pay no attention as our online propagandists spread rumors online that everyone in xyz town who was 'quanarantined' and died, was actually put in a camp, and/or killed."

How would you prove someone didn't die from the vaccine, when you have no proof otherwise. It's your word against a government that can censor anything, change any record, and arrest anyone for investigating.

Wouldn't it be a perfect cover? Without knowing someones vax status, any NGO, or government, could kill anyone, and then spread rumors they were vaxed all while *officially* denying vaxes kill anyone--loudly and conspicuously. And we'd all be lead to believe it was the vax. The athlete deaths and other conspicuous deaths would be a trial run for this method. They could kill entire towns of people if they wanted, use cartels, or units of the military, freshly staffed with illegals. Do it by night, blackout communications, and kill or round up dissidents. How would you prove you aren't vaccinated when government records can be altered to say you are? "Oh, turns out some batches were HOT! Now we're seeing large scale deaths. Pay no attention as our online propagandists spread rumors online that everyone in xyz town who was 'quanarantined' and died, was actually put in a camp, and/or killed." How would you prove someone didn't die from the vaccine, when you have no proof otherwise. It's your word against a government that can censor anything, change any record, and arrest anyone for investigating.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (7).
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I don't know how much "ramping up" you want. Insurance companies report 40% more deaths they are paying out on.

40% over average, not total.

it's absurd to say it's assassinations. That's silly.

Sillier than using a general spike in death to cover state sanctioned murder?

When if you assume the death rate is up because of the vaxx, then you already accept the premise that the regime could and would commit mass covert murder.

I find it suspect of you then that you would accept the first premise, but call the second premise 'silly'.

The regime has proven the intent to murder in the general case, then how much more of a stretch is it in the specific? The first premise, that it was a mass murder event, either negligent, or with malice, is greater stretch than the second case, that in addition to murder on a large scale, it is also likely to be used at the small scale against dissidents.

But for some reason you skip right over this conclusion that the first is accepted, while the second isn't simply improbable, but absurd.

It's self-insertion. Which tells me you either don't even believe the foundation of the first premise, that deaths are up by 40%, which would make you a liar, or you have a specific reason that that ancillary to the debate, for rejecting the more specific argument.

Just because I play a fool, doesn't mean I am one.