Watch the first 14 minutes or so of this. It’s Tucker Carlson from last night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3g-S_q_CAk
I don’t remember for sure, but I think I posted that discussion with the inventor of mRNA, who says that there are a lot of questions about these injections that need to be answered before ANY honest scientist can claim without lying that they feel confident the benefits outweigh the risks.
As mentioned on that segment, that piece was deleted. This, even though it is literally impossible that anyone at YouTube had better qualifications than arguably the most qualified guy on the planet.
And of course they KNOW this. Google knows this. YouTube, which Google owns, knows this. The people hitting the delete buttons, if they have an IQ over 100, know this.
So science is not the question. Science is on the side of the best qualified scientists, particularly those who have not been caught repeatedly in patently politically motivated lies.
So who benefits from this censorship? If saving lives is the criteria, is not science the method, and if science is not the method, can we not assume saving lives is not the criteria?
Yes, by now, yes. Certainly. They are not trying to save lives, or get people back to normal.
So you have to ask what the game is, and it occurred to me that paying people to REMOVE competing claims and narratives amounts to a form of advertising, doesn’t it? Could not Big Pharma pay huge amounts of money to Google for what amounts to inverted advertising, which is not them pushing the agenda, but preventing any other competing narrative from coalescing? Yes, I think so.
Could be the Chinese, could be Big Pharma, could be Bill Gates or George Soros. But SOMEBODY is most likely paying for all this. And they may pay big. All of those mentioned could easily afford a billion dollars to make even the carefully chosen, cautious, conservative words of Dr. Robert Malone disappear.
You can buy Memory Holes, in other words. Maybe there are bidding wars, although of course everyone wins if those particular facts disappear, even if their motives vary widely.
And I would add this: Big Pharma in effect used public funds for private profit. The governments of the world paid them to develop these injections, but are not asking for any of the profit.
If I were them, I would hide the huge windfalls being made. I would make it look like, oh I had huge costs, there is this going on and that, and oh I’m afraid even with all this we can’t pay a dividend this year.
What they DO NOT WANT, under any circumstances, is to look like they are making out like more or less literal bandits, PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE.
It can’t be said too often that you have to look for what is not there, as well as what is. A wheel is defined by its spaces, and unusable without the one in the middle.
Why would Pfizer and Moderna NOT be posting record profits? I assume they are. They just don’t want ordinary people to know how much they have benefited from what amounts to a novel form of war profiteering. It still involves fear induced by propaganda, still involves huge government expenditures, and even still involves pointless and large scale loss of life.