Bill Gates “controls” the WHO: This idea stems from the fact that the Gates Foundation is one of the largest non-governmental donors to the WHO. Critics argue that this financial influence gives Gates outsized sway over global health policy.
Vaccines as profit schemes: RFK Jr. and others allege that Gates and Fauci promoted vaccines not purely for public health, but as a way to generate revenue and exert control over poorer nations.
Forced vaccination: The theory suggests that developing countries are coerced into accepting vaccines through WHO mandates or funding dependencies.
🧠 What the Evidence Actually Shows.
The Gates Foundation’s role: It has donated hundreds of millions to global health initiatives, including vaccine development and distribution. While influential, Gates does not “control” the WHO in any formal or legal sense.
GAVI and vaccine access: GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance -- founded with support from the Gates Foundation—aims to increase vaccine access in low-income countries. RFK Jr. has criticized GAVI for allegedly prioritizing public relations over safety, but these claims are not supported by mainstream scientific consensus.
Debunked claims: Many of RFK Jr.’s vaccine-related assertions, including links between vaccines and autism or microchip tracking, have been widely debunked by experts and fact-checkers.
🎭 Why This Narrative Persists.
Emotional logic: It taps into fears of global control, medical coercion, and elite manipulation -- especially potent in post-pandemic discourse.
Ideological fluidity: Though RFK Jr. identifies as left-leaning, his vaccine skepticism and anti-establishment rhetoric resonate with many on the populist right—hence Jimmy Dore’s amplification.
Rhetorical theater: These claims often function more as symbolic storytelling than evidence-based critique. They dramatize complex global health systems into digestible villains and heroes.
You’re right to be skeptical. The idea that vaccine distribution in poor countries is a “scam” orchestrated by Gates and Fauci lacks credible evidence and relies heavily on ideological projection.
[end]
Why would Bill Gates need to run a "vaccine scam" when he is already incredibly wealthy? This conspiracy theory makes no sense. It seems you believe him to be some kind of super villain.
...like "increasing vaccine access" for vaccines banned in western countries due to adverse side effects like "death". Did you address that issue, or ignore it and focus on the "increase vaccine access" part?
According to a major study led by the World Health Organization and published by The Lancet, global immunization efforts have saved at least 154 million lives over the past 50 years. That’s six lives every minute, with 101 million of those being infants. The measles vaccine alone accounts for 60% of those lives saved, and polio vaccination has prevented paralysis in over 20 million people.
So yes -- the side effect is life. And the effort to sow doubt about vaccines, especially in vulnerable regions, is not just misinformed -- it’s dangerous. When people frame vaccine access as a sinister plot, they’re not just questioning science; they’re undermining decades of public health work that has literally reshaped survival odds for entire populations.
(via copilot).
It VERY much seems to me that you WANT people to die. Yet you post about declining birth rates and human extinction. You don't find that desirable? It can't be that you want the "right" people to die. Given that you're OK with trump supporters not getting vaccinated and dying in larger numbers. It seems you want as many people to die as possible, no matter who they are.
Led by Bill Gate's leashed vaccine dog (WHO)? The same "Lancet" that claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died in the first few days of the Iraq War? lol!
Referring to WHO as “Bill Gates’ leashed vaccine dog” is a way to delegitimize the organization by tying it to a figure often targeted in anti-vaccine and conspiracy circles.
It’s not a critique of the data -- it’s a smear of the institution.
📉 2. Misrepresentation of The Lancet.
The Lancet did publish a study estimating excess deaths in Iraq, but the commenter mischaracterizes it as claiming “hundreds of thousands died in the first few days.” That’s false.
The actual study estimated 655,000 excess deaths over a span of years, and while the methodology was debated, it was not dismissed as fraudulent.
🧪 3. Ignoring the actual findings.
The WHO-led study, published in The Lancet, found that 154 million lives have been saved through immunization over the past 50 years.
101 million of those lives were infants, and measles vaccination alone accounted for 60% of the lives saved.
Polio vaccination prevented paralysis in over 20 million people, and the global reduction in infant mortality due to vaccines is estimated at 40%.
[end]
You dispute ALL of that? Vaccines are useless?
I thought that you previously said that you trust traditionally vaccines (non mRNA vaccines that contain a weakened form of the virus). The VAST majority of the lives saved is due to traditional vaccines. Now you are disputing the efficacy of traditional (live attenuated, inactivated, or subunit vaccines) entirely?
Vaccines offer permanent immunity. The Covid "vaccine" wasn't a real vaccine. It was a temporary Covid "antibody production accelerator" that wore off after a couple of months and left the vaccinated individual succeptable to other infections and diseases by a weakened immune system producing the wrong antibodies.
And I do trust "tested" vaccines. Not experimental vaccines. And the ones that failed the tests are being mandated for Africans so that Big Pharma can get paid for harmful vaccines rejected in the West because they kill and injure (with side efeects) the very people that they claim to be "helping".
The comment opens with a binary distinction -- “real” vaccines vs. the COVID vaccine -- framing the latter as a deceptive substitute. This sets up a narrative of betrayal and systemic failure.
•Emotional Logic:
The tone is accusatory and distrustful, rooted in a sense of violated expectations. The speaker positions themselves as someone who trusts “tested” vaccines but feels misled by what they perceive as experimental overreach.
• Ideological Framing: The comment blends medical skepticism with geopolitical critique, suggesting that rejected vaccines are being offloaded onto African populations for profit. This invokes a colonial exploitation narrative, but reframed through a populist lens.
• Moral Positioning:
The final line -- “the Left hates black lives” -- is a provocative moral inversion of the Black Lives Matter slogan. It’s designed to emotionally shock, suggesting hypocrisy and greed as the true motivators behind progressive rhetoric.
[end]
Mystere: Dervish keeps using his "Fart Robot" to spew his liberal whoppers.
I use Copilot to help expose Truths. They are "whoppers" to you because my truths contradict the lies you like.
Concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic led the dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster to update its definition of "vaccine" to account for the novel technology used in mRNA vaccines. Beyond this, there is no official "redefinition" of mRNA vaccines; rather, the technology itself represents a major scientific advancement in vaccinology. The key difference lies in how traditional and mRNA vaccines instruct the body to generate an immune response. The updated definition of "vaccine" In 2021, Merriam-Webster revised its entry for "vaccine" to include specific language that addresses the mRNA type: Previous focus: The older definition emphasized a substance that provided "immunity" against a disease. Revised for clarity: The new definition replaced "immunity" with the more scientifically accurate term "immune response" to describe how vaccines, including mRNA types, function. It also added a new sub-definition to explicitly mention preparations of genetic material, like messenger RNA, that prompt the body's cells to produce an antigenic substance
Bye-Bye immunity. Hello injections every 3 months to stimulate the immune system producing antigens for non-present infections instead of antigens for present ones. In other words hijacking and "neutralizing" the immune system so that other pathogens can proliferate and cause diseases.
20 comments:
🐂💩
Via Copilot...
🧪 The Allegations.
Bill Gates “controls” the WHO: This idea stems from the fact that the Gates Foundation is one of the largest non-governmental donors to the WHO. Critics argue that this financial influence gives Gates outsized sway over global health policy.
Vaccines as profit schemes: RFK Jr. and others allege that Gates and Fauci promoted vaccines not purely for public health, but as a way to generate revenue and exert control over poorer nations.
Forced vaccination: The theory suggests that developing countries are coerced into accepting vaccines through WHO mandates or funding dependencies.
🧠 What the Evidence Actually Shows.
The Gates Foundation’s role: It has donated hundreds of millions to global health initiatives, including vaccine development and distribution. While influential, Gates does not “control” the WHO in any formal or legal sense.
GAVI and vaccine access: GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance -- founded with support from the Gates Foundation—aims to increase vaccine access in low-income countries. RFK Jr. has criticized GAVI for allegedly prioritizing public relations over safety, but these claims are not supported by mainstream scientific consensus.
Debunked claims: Many of RFK Jr.’s vaccine-related assertions, including links between vaccines and autism or microchip tracking, have been widely debunked by experts and fact-checkers.
🎭 Why This Narrative Persists.
Emotional logic: It taps into fears of global control, medical coercion, and elite manipulation -- especially potent in post-pandemic discourse.
Ideological fluidity: Though RFK Jr. identifies as left-leaning, his vaccine skepticism and anti-establishment rhetoric resonate with many on the populist right—hence Jimmy Dore’s amplification.
Rhetorical theater: These claims often function more as symbolic storytelling than evidence-based critique. They dramatize complex global health systems into digestible villains and heroes.
You’re right to be skeptical. The idea that vaccine distribution in poor countries is a “scam” orchestrated by Gates and Fauci lacks credible evidence and relies heavily on ideological projection.
[end]
Why would Bill Gates need to run a "vaccine scam" when he is already incredibly wealthy? This conspiracy theory makes no sense. It seems you believe him to be some kind of super villain.
FYI, that's el0n Musk.
Addressed none of Kennedy's allegations and instead substituted Vax Strawmen. But hey, that's Leftism 101. Debunk the strawmen.
The allegations were directly addressed. No "strawmen" were substitute.
...like "increasing vaccine access" for vaccines banned in western countries due to adverse side effects like "death". Did you address that issue, or ignore it and focus on the "increase vaccine access" part?
...the "strawman" part.
wtf is wrong with you?
According to a major study led by the World Health Organization and published by The Lancet, global immunization efforts have saved at least 154 million lives over the past 50 years. That’s six lives every minute, with 101 million of those being infants. The measles vaccine alone accounts for 60% of those lives saved, and polio vaccination has prevented paralysis in over 20 million people.
So yes -- the side effect is life. And the effort to sow doubt about vaccines, especially in vulnerable regions, is not just misinformed -- it’s dangerous. When people frame vaccine access as a sinister plot, they’re not just questioning science; they’re undermining decades of public health work that has literally reshaped survival odds for entire populations.
(via copilot).
It VERY much seems to me that you WANT people to die. Yet you post about declining birth rates and human extinction. You don't find that desirable? It can't be that you want the "right" people to die. Given that you're OK with trump supporters not getting vaccinated and dying in larger numbers. It seems you want as many people to die as possible, no matter who they are.
Led by Bill Gate's leashed vaccine dog (WHO)? The same "Lancet" that claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died in the first few days of the Iraq War? lol!
Via Copilot...
🧠 1. Ad hominem and guilt by association.
Referring to WHO as “Bill Gates’ leashed vaccine dog” is a way to delegitimize the organization by tying it to a figure often targeted in anti-vaccine and conspiracy circles.
It’s not a critique of the data -- it’s a smear of the institution.
📉 2. Misrepresentation of The Lancet.
The Lancet did publish a study estimating excess deaths in Iraq, but the commenter mischaracterizes it as claiming “hundreds of thousands died in the first few days.” That’s false.
The actual study estimated 655,000 excess deaths over a span of years, and while the methodology was debated, it was not dismissed as fraudulent.
🧪 3. Ignoring the actual findings.
The WHO-led study, published in The Lancet, found that 154 million lives have been saved through immunization over the past 50 years.
101 million of those lives were infants, and measles vaccination alone accounted for 60% of the lives saved.
Polio vaccination prevented paralysis in over 20 million people, and the global reduction in infant mortality due to vaccines is estimated at 40%.
[end]
You dispute ALL of that? Vaccines are useless?
I thought that you previously said that you trust traditionally vaccines (non mRNA vaccines that contain a weakened form of the virus). The VAST majority of the lives saved is due to traditional vaccines. Now you are disputing the efficacy of traditional (live attenuated, inactivated, or subunit vaccines) entirely?
Vaccines offer permanent immunity. The Covid "vaccine" wasn't a real vaccine. It was a temporary Covid "antibody production accelerator" that wore off after a couple of months and left the vaccinated individual succeptable to other infections and diseases by a weakened immune system producing the wrong antibodies.
And I do trust "tested" vaccines. Not experimental vaccines. And the ones that failed the tests are being mandated for Africans so that Big Pharma can get paid for harmful vaccines rejected in the West because they kill and injure (with side efeects) the very people that they claim to be "helping".
But hey, despite all the "Black Lives Matter" chants, the Left hates black lives. The simply love green money.
Dervish keeps using his "Fart Robot" to spew his liberal whoppers.
Oh looking, the fart showed up.
So why speak in the third person, les?
I'm not. But If you think so it's all that need be known about you.
..whereas with you, there are at least two things to know. And the second is the smell that accompanies the first.
Minus FJ: [spews🐂💩]
Via Copilot...
🧠 Rhetorical Analysis:
• Claim Structure:
The comment opens with a binary distinction -- “real” vaccines vs. the COVID vaccine -- framing the latter as a deceptive substitute. This sets up a narrative of betrayal and systemic failure.
•Emotional Logic:
The tone is accusatory and distrustful, rooted in a sense of violated expectations. The speaker positions themselves as someone who trusts “tested” vaccines but feels misled by what they perceive as experimental overreach.
• Ideological Framing:
The comment blends medical skepticism with geopolitical critique, suggesting that rejected vaccines are being offloaded onto African populations for profit. This invokes a colonial exploitation narrative, but reframed through a populist lens.
• Moral Positioning:
The final line -- “the Left hates black lives” -- is a provocative moral inversion of the Black Lives Matter slogan. It’s designed to emotionally shock, suggesting hypocrisy and greed as the true motivators behind progressive rhetoric.
[end]
Mystere: Dervish keeps using his "Fart Robot" to spew his liberal whoppers.
I use Copilot to help expose Truths. They are "whoppers" to you because my truths contradict the lies you like.
The MAGA swamp loves misinformation, deceit, outright lies, and anything else that supports their delusions.
The CDC LITERALLY had to redefine the word "vaccine" for mRNA inclusion. LITERALLY.
Bullshit. But we know you admire the ignorant herion addict and sexual pervert rfk jr.
Google AI:
Concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic led the dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster to update its definition of "vaccine" to account for the novel technology used in mRNA vaccines. Beyond this, there is no official "redefinition" of mRNA vaccines; rather, the technology itself represents a major scientific advancement in vaccinology.
The key difference lies in how traditional and mRNA vaccines instruct the body to generate an immune response.
The updated definition of "vaccine"
In 2021, Merriam-Webster revised its entry for "vaccine" to include specific language that addresses the mRNA type:
Previous focus: The older definition emphasized a substance that provided "immunity" against a disease.
Revised for clarity: The new definition replaced "immunity" with the more scientifically accurate term "immune response" to describe how vaccines, including mRNA types, function. It also added a new sub-definition to explicitly mention preparations of genetic material, like messenger RNA, that prompt the body's cells to produce an antigenic substance
Bye-Bye immunity. Hello injections every 3 months to stimulate the immune system producing antigens for non-present infections instead of antigens for present ones. In other words hijacking and "neutralizing" the immune system so that other pathogens can proliferate and cause diseases.
Post a Comment