This is a reply in another thread by another anon and my reply to it.
the original comment:
EmotionallyDrained 1 point 1 hour ago +1 / -0 If your country is at war, and there is no way you can stop all suffering and death but you can save most by sacrificing a "few," would you do it? Could you make that hard choice? Pray for him and all of us.
my reply:
NewbieQbie 1 point moments ago +1 / -0 he basically said as much. He was talking about which state to allow to house the Space Force headquarters and said it was tough choosing, but it had to be done. Then told the crowd something along the lines of "Do you think you could make the decision if you had to? Do you know how tough these things are?" If choosing where to put a military headquarters is tough, IMAGINE choosing to endorse or not endorse a vaccine you needed to facilitate to prevent permanent lockdown of society???
The need is not for the contents of the vaccine, but rather the existence of a symbol to end the pandemic. The cabal's primary weapon is manipulation of the people through mass media. It is true that if the end is a totally foregone conclusion, neutralizing their weapon wouldn't have to be done. But it is also true that to achieve the conclusion you want, certain actions must be taken. The action of breaking the covid narrative with a vaccine ahead of time was simply a necessary part of the plan to weaken the cabal's weaponized covid narrative. What's in the vaccine is incidental, whether good or bad. Don't conflate NCSWIC with "we'll win without suffering any losses."
Yeah, but weakening that narrative is apparently resulting in tens of millions of deaths.
Which, honestly, is not cutting it as a White Hat plan. At all. We're talking about surpassing Hitler in the number of innocent deaths, and doing so with deception, rather than force, so that people are willingly injecting themselves with a poison.
That's a good guy plan to you?
Shit, you could literally march government stormtroopers into CNN and take it over by force, and deal with the resulting "civil war", and still have less deaths than the number of people in this country who will die of this apparently poisonous vaccine.
If you're looking for a Great Awakening where the survivors admit that you were right all along and this was all worth it, that's not going to be the path to get there. People would be losing their families to this, including Trump supporters.
In fact, I can't think of a single more likely cause of civil war than Q coming out and saying, "Yeah, well, tens of millions (or hundreds of millions) of innocent people died, sure, but at least you learned your lesson about believing the news."
You're assuming two things there: one is that every vaccine shot is fatal, and another is that a better alternative was available. I'm not sure that either assumption is correct.
In terms of "better alternative," keep in mind that I don't pretend to know the cabal's playbook of contingency plans, but a simple review of communist takeovers from Lenin to Mao to Pol Pot and Kim Jong Il have demonstrated that many worse outcomes exist. And the risk of being pushed into a situation of gradual and constant restriction from which escape appears impossible, like the Uighers and Chinese society in general, is real.
Of course it would be great if the cabal had been driven out before infiltration became endemic, at which point an open attack would be preferred by most everyone. But that isn't our situation. The assumption is that a head-on approach would have threatened the country's survival more than devolution and the current work of flipping assets, including media assets, to gradually bring people to see what was almost lost.
By the way, have you ever looked into the decoding symbols guy? (https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/blog/) His analysis is high-level meta. I think you'd appreciate it, although it is time-consuming.
I’ll take a look.