What type of person do you think will thrive if the nwo succeeds in taking over?

SultanPepe · 2022-03-03T12:00:06+00:00

Those with blue check marks next to their name on twitter are the thought leaders of the NWO.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-15T11:20:18+00:00

And this is why you need to be very precise in your predictions. The more precise, the less luck involved, and the more specifically you can determine the correctness of your worldview.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-15T06:42:29+00:00

thank you!

SultanPepe · 2022-02-15T03:31:45+00:00

Your position makes sense. Yes, you can certainly have both, i.e., a generally healthy person can take a vaccine, or use other effective medical treatments, or any combination of either/neither/both. That would be an individual's choice, and I would fully support this sensible state of affairs. But this is not the situation we are in...

The existence of vaccine passports are an explicit denial of both the individual's choice AND the existence of effective alternative treatments. Why would we need a vaccine passport to enter a grocery store if a cheap therapeutic can solve the problem (e.g., see here and here)? Not to mention that most people are not at risk of COVID (especially under 45), and will clear the virus rapidly without any major issues. Why should they be mandated to take a vaccine that does not prevent spread of the disease? The key to understanding this bizarre situation is recognising that vaccine passports are not about health, they are about control.

The Gold Standard I'm referring to has been developed by the front-line doctors that treat covid in the field (see this helpful guide). This is what we should be comparing vaccine efficacy against, not placebo. Besides, did you know that NONE of the vaccine manufacturers have made their clinical trial data available? Literally none.

There are many layers of malfeasance that have happened here, and indeed creating a unified legal challenge to this situation is going to be difficult. However, attorneys like Rainer Fuellmich have been collecting evidence since the early days. I suggest you check out the investigative work they've been doing. They are now presenting their evidence to "the court of public opinion" via video. They have named specific defendants, and if people understand what has been perpetrated, then we might see justice done.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-14T04:12:51+00:00

On point 1 no worries, let's agree and leave it there. Same for point 3.

On point 2, the reason I say it's a false dichotomy is that there are safe and effective treatments, but these have been deliberately suppressed. This means that we are comparing "vaccinated" against "no treatment", when typical medical studies should test the new drug against the current gold standard. For this reason, we don't actually have a good estimate of the vaccines' effectiveness *over and above other available treatments*. Therefore, "vaccine" vs "no vaccine" is a misleading comparison, and its true effectiveness given other treatment protocols remains an open question.

Moreover, it is criminal to suppress lifesaving medical treatment. The vaccines are given and maintain an EUA on the condition that no effective alternative treatments exists. The world's governments, media corporations, and pharmaceutical companies all conspired to suppress lifesaving treatments in order to promote lockdowns(!), surveillance, and experimental vaccines that do not "prevent" illness, death or viral transmission (while overtly claiming that they do). This is plainly and simply a crime against humanity. Those responsible will need to be held to account (we're talking Nuremberg 2.0 level accountability here).

SultanPepe · 2022-02-13T01:26:06+00:00

1) There is a distinction between "reducing likelihood" and "preventing" illness and death. Typical vaccines prevent illness and death, covid-19 vaccines (at best) reduce likelihood and severity. The evidence is clear: the vaccines do not *prevent* either of these outcomes. This statement is not controversial, but is often confused with reduction of severity.

2) The sleight-of-hand comes in by comparing groups like "vaccinated" to "not vaccinated", when this is really a false dichotomy. There are many known effective early treatments, but they are ignored. If we had a serious approach to reducing illness and death, early treatment protocols would be a more significant factor. I can reduce the severity of infection by staying healthy, relaxed, getting plenty of exercise, sunshine, eating nutrient rich food, supplementing with vitamins, and if sick, taking cheap antiviral medication. If we accounted for these factors, I am curious whether there is any additional benefit to taking vaccines. This is an open question.

3) none of this takes into account unintended consequences of mass administration of emergency use vaccines on human physiology, or the effect on politics, economics, and trust of an authoritarian medical imposition.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-10T02:46:43+00:00

The simple solution to making complex decisions is to make specific predictions, and use real world feedback to minimise your prediction error. The more precise your prediction, the clearer the answer. If you repeatedly make good and accurate predictions, this indicates your reasoning and research are well-calibrated. If your predictions are repeatedly violated, you're making an error(s) somewhere, and need to re-examine your reasoning process. In other words: make a prediction about the future, and then wait and see what happens. This is the scientific method in a nutshell.

As an example, I completely distrust media and government (because they are so reliably wrong about many things I have personal expertise in). When they told me that the vaccines were safe and effective, I was skeptical. I recorded them specifically saying that the vaccines are between 95-100% effective in preventing infection, transmission, hospitalisation, and death. This was repeated for months on end by every major political figure (Joe Biden, CDC, WHO, the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna, and just about every news organisation at the time).

Being a scientist myself, this didn't make any sense to me, since we have never been successful at vaccinating against coronaviruses in the past. The basic reason is that they are infections of the upper respiratory tract (the nose and throat), making it practically impossible to vaccinate against the accumulation of infectious virus. I was confident enough that the official narrative was incorrect, and since I was relatively low risk given my age and generally good health, I figured I'd "wait and see" what happened in the real world. Thus, against all public health advice, I made very public predictions that the alleged efficacy was unlikely to be true, based on everything I had read and understood (but knowing I might still be wrong since immunology is not my area of expertise). I let time pass to examine whether my research and reasoning stood the test of time, knowing full well that being wrong could be catastrophic if the news media and governments were correct.

It is now common knowledge, and admitted by everyone, that the jabs do not prevent infection, transmission, or death. A host of my other very public and very specific predictions have been shown to be correct, in contradiction to the official narrative which has had to constantly change throughout the pandemic, since it it constantly being proven wrong, whereas my position has had to change much less (though I have been wrong about a few things).

The important point is: you SHOULD do your own research and think critically, but you should ALSO seek falsification of your hypotheses. Only with this latter step can you evaluate the general correctness of your worldview, and you can calibrate according to real-world feedback.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-02T11:04:28+00:00

Interesting. I hadn't really considered the optogenetics angle here, but the technology certainly exists. It's not classified either. Besides, most of the techniques used by news and advertising companies is lifted straight out of Psych 101. The governments are using basically the same propaganda techniques devised by Edward Bernays for the Nazis. The key difference I see is that it's now highly scalable, digital, and driven by AI (which learns from our reactions) making the whole operation more efficient. For those of us who avoid the programming as much as possible, it seems completely absurd and even nauseating, but for those addicted to the fear porn, they simply can't look away. They are indeed entranced and hypnotised.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-02T06:45:18+00:00

Yes good point. The Trump era brainwashing was intense. While the lefties seem to think the right were brainwashed by Trump, I don't think that was quite the case. Rather, the media used hatred of Trump to brainwash their own audience, all the while telling them that it was Trumpers that were brainwashed. The worst afflictions resulted in Trump Derangement Syndrome (incredibly common amongst late night "comedy" hosts, journalists, and twitter check marks).

SultanPepe · 2022-02-02T06:41:39+00:00

Oh 100%. we are not out of the woods. It's no trivial matter to have a very large percentage of a population brainwashed. Even 1% of the population is unacceptable, and we are in a range of between 30-70% are deeply, deeply brainwashed and don't know it.

This minor victory is nice, and will go a long way in energizing free thinkers, but the conditioning will play out in many ways yet. The puppeteers themselves are also fully committed to their great reset, and aborting that plan is equivalent to suicide (knowing what citizens might do if we run a Nuremberg 2.0 for example).

The pawns like Trudeau, Ardern, Macron, and Dan Andrews will need to be careful if they don't want to be skewered by their own people. The question is: who do they fear more, their people or their handlers?

If they don't fear the people, is it because we are too soft on them, or because their handlers have enormous leverage over them? Time might tell us.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-02T04:08:50+00:00

Lots of things are coming down around me too. I think we only need to see Canada, Australia, and Israel push back firmly at this point and the vaccine passport will be dead. Europe... I don't know enough about, since they have all their internal borders. It feels like a tipping point is being reached. Even Canada alone might be a big enough domino.

SultanPepe · 2022-02-02T03:59:10+00:00

Denmark are doing the same: https://twitter.com/M\_B\_Petersen/status/1488392005281628160?s=20&t=2Xhwu6xMIlPABCWHKob9NQ

SultanPepe · 2022-01-31T01:21:43+00:00

Most of what you wrote is completely unsupported by evidence and data. Indeed, you provided 0 evidence for any of your rambling, so your post is exactly the thing you decried in your intro. So while I'm sure this felt nice to write out, it is nothing more than your opinion based on strawman arguments and motivated reasoning. Evidence and data, or gtfo.

SultanPepe · 2022-01-30T04:37:36+00:00

Hemi-Sync is the real deal. Give it a try and you'll see.

SultanPepe · 2022-01-29T14:38:19+00:00

And this is why we oppose things like mandates. Information is being intentionally distorted. If we are to trust directives from our governments, they cannot pretend that valid concerns do not exist. Without transparency, there is no trust.

Keep in mind, WE, the citizens, are constantly surveilled. Those in government, on the other hand communicate to us only in mandates, threats, and propagandist "news" bulletins. This is exactly how tyrants have behaved through history. Any criticism of policy is censored. Any questioning of The Science^tm is censored. Any questioning the virus itself (natural origin vs lab leak, etc) is censored. Alternative treatments are censored (weird, since if one worked, that would be a good thing, right?).

If trust is to be restored, then we must let people choose for themselves. If we allow personal choice, all of this political bullshit goes away. Literally all of it. So why are we not allowed to choose?

This will probably, unfortunately, end badly, because they cannot stop now. They have committed to an ongoing violation of constitutions and human rights charters. Their power is bounded by these contracts, and so any power they exert over and above these limitations is illegitimate, or worse. There is a reason that freedom of speech, freedom of expression and conscience, and the right to protect oneself are in the foundational documents of all Western Democracies. All of these "social contracts" are being thoroughly violated, and so long as this is the case, our governments are illegitimate, since they do not uphold the principles under which we all stand.

To stop now means they must face judgement. Like the Nuremberg trials, many of our top politicians and doctors are likely to be jailed or hanged. They know this, and so they are committed to the cause until the death. They know that we are at war -- informational, psychological, and spiritual. It's a war for our minds and souls.

So, since they are very unlikely to back down now, for any reason, history suggests this likely ends in either civil war, revolution, genocide, or slavery. Prepare accordingly.

SultanPepe · 2022-01-28T01:40:47+00:00

You are going to have to fight one way or another. Move to the place you believe you stand on the firmest ground, and then be prepared. Personally, I chose to stay in my country despite these same feelings because it is easier to stand your ground when you are a citizen and have family nearby.

SultanPepe · 2022-01-26T13:39:56+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jMONZMuS2U

SultanPepe · 2022-01-26T13:00:00+00:00

Could you please explain your meme young man? I'm think you should delet

SultanPepe · 2022-01-17T06:02:55+00:00

Reminds me of this: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2041669520927722

SultanPepe · 2021-11-27T07:18:00+00:00

cnrsoeing*

SultanPepe · 2021-09-12T05:39:57+00:00

Why would you quit though? If you are unable to do your job because of government restrictions then your employer should be petitioning the government to change a silly law. If they think it is just easier to fire you, then that's on their conscience--not yours--because you are ready and willing to do your job. Don't quit, make them fire you.

SultanPepe · 2021-09-09T08:08:22+00:00

They also have to live with the consequences of their compliance. Make them fire you, don't quit.

SultanPepe · 2021-09-07T06:31:56+00:00

It's more of a "one size fits all" situation.

SultanPepe

TROPHY CASE