This post is being made primarily in the interest of all new users and curious visitors to this place. In that there are many of the negatively-oriented variety who have blended in amongst us all in here, so to speak. This is primarily so because these ones know for a fact that all of the sneaky little tricks that they use and utilize on all of the other controlled, bought, and thoroughly manipulated forms of mass and social media simply would not work in here. And yet, it is surprisingly easy to tell these ones apart. And I'm going to tell you all just how.
It's surprisingly SIMPLE: Nearly everything they write is full of negativity, fear, hatred, fear-mongering, dooming, negative or doomsday type predictions, war-mongering, anger, rage, (covertly or overtly expressed) disappointment, and other made-up depressing shit.
In other words, if reading a post or comment makes you feel unnecessarily sad, mad, depressed, anxious, scared, panicky, hopeless, or even helpless --- congratulations, you've spotted a well blended in SHILL.
Because you see, it's not that difficult at all to pretend to be one of us. But when push comes to shove, these ones' masks come off.
So the next time you encounter absolutely any of them, ask them the following questions. And then, enjoy the free flow of salt as they struggle and squirm to answer even as much as a single question satisfactorily. For these ones are no different than your average household cockroaches or lizards, for their darkness-party ENDS the very MOMENT you turn on the LIGHT. So go switch on that light, by asking them to answer why:
QUESTION ONE: If the dark ones are truly winning, how come they STILL haven't been able to start off their dream project known as World War 3? It's been well over an entire month since that whole Ukraine madness started. You'd think someone truly powerful would've got that shit started full power by now.
QUESTION TWO: Where even are the dreaded 5G rollouts that were (well more than) supposed to be here by now? Forget globally, they haven't even been able to get that shit working locally. Doesn't look all that much like "winning" to me!
QUESTION THREE: If they were indeed that much powerful, how in the actual fuck is the Hunter Biden laptop story now mainstream instead of being hidden for good?
QUESTION FOUR: Why IS the entire world still not masked up, locked down, fully vaxxed, and thoroughly under NWO governance even after, what's it been like, 2 whole years of the whole plandemic restriction-setting and propagandas?
QUESTION FIVE: How in the world is Joe Rogan STILL walking around freely, still having a 20 million listener podcast and all, and STILL NOT cancelled by the "powerful" and "winning" commie elite?
QUESTION SIX: How the fuck were they even unable to prevent some random Tweeter from leaking the Ukraine Biolabs story? And beyond even that, how in the actual fuck did that story even become Actually. Fucking. MAINSTREAM??
"All powerful" and "winning" elite? Pfft, gimme a FUCKING break.
QUESTION SEVEN: If the elite were actually winning, why the fuck would some of the very BIGGEST paedo celebs out there upon our planet just, well --- Start. Utterly. Vanishing? And I'm not even SAYING THAT, folks --- ELON Motherfucking MUSK is.
Also, speaking of Mr. Musk, isn't it rather surprising just how much hate he's been getting on here, lately? And for what, dropping redpill bombs all over the place? Isn't that supposed to be a good thing regardless of what side he's even on? Even stranger, is that he's still getting hate even after buying that stake in Twitter. Which is super fucking surprising to me because, why the FUCK would the Black Hats have Elon buy Twitter (assuming he's working for them here), when @Jack has already been doing a supremely stellar job at the whole mass censorship and dissent-culling routine? Doesn't the very idea contradict itself? I mean, the guy banned Donald J Trump for fucksake; why would he even need a "better" replacement? Unless of course, Twitter is not just 9.2% under White Hat control, but instead, a whole ONE HUNDRED PERCENT by now.
Now, I'm not necessarily saying here that Elon Musk is a confirmed White Hat or anything, but, if he's a Black Hat, then, all of that LOGIC simply DOES NOT ADD UP. Besides, all of the liberals and commies and all of their news outlets have been busy tearing him down 24x7x366 --- and for many, many, months now. When was the last time those ones were up to any good? And, beyond even that, when was the last time people on here were in agreement with these mainstream agenda-pusher ones? So Elon Musk getting hate ON HERE for, quite literally, RED-PILLING THE ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET simply DOES NOT add up or compute for me. And neither does the idea of people on here so perfectly agreeing with the MSM and Liberal narratives --- so I must then suspect that great shilling is afoot.
Now I know for a fact that some people on here will then bring up Neuralink, which is perfectly a valid counterpoint to this all. But then hey, you know what, even Trump pushed for vaccines openly. You gonna hold him up to the exact same standards now? Or is that move then recognized as just an "act?" Pick ONE. Fucking. CHOICE.
In conclusion, BEWARE OF THOSE who are only and ONLY here to DISCOURAGE and DISSUADE you from being fully awakened and spreading the word about it. Also, BEWARE OF THOSE who are way too much in agreement with a mainstream point of view on things, and especially so when the said viewpoint is just highly, HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE (to say the very least!) Not telling you to either trust or not trust either Trump or Musk or absolutely whoever else, but be very, VERY wary of those who look all too keen on pushing a narrative, and those who use deflection, deception, and other illogical shit to push you towards doom and gloom. Because the Great Awakening is very much so ALIVE AND ACTIVE, and, dare I even say THRIVING (to say the very least!)
NO SHILL CAN STOP WHAT IS COMING.
NONE WHOSOEVER.
Enjoy the show.
WWG1WGA
I misunderstood your argument for the doctor and apologize. However, forcing someone to conduct a business transaction against their will is hardly being for individual freedom, wouldn't you say? Why do the customer's right to be served trump the business owner's right to deny service?
For example, if two consenting adults agree to have sex that is good and fine. However, if one does not consent and the act of sex is carried out it is now called rape and that is wrong.
By the way, in the case of the wedding cake example, the business owners were being commissioned to make a creative work. It wasn't just selling a premade cake to a couple of gays. Does this change your perspective of the case?
It's tricky, and I'm not sure. On the one hand, forcing someone to sell to anyone might be bad. The "Right to refuse service to anyone" does sound kind of right, so perhaps. However, I have been kicked out of grocery stores for not wearing a mask. My right to purchase food and not die of starvation was infringed because they disagreed with my beliefs about masks. So is there really a "Right to refuse service to anyone?"
The mask issue was what I had in mind when I wrote it. I'm fairly sure that refusing to sell me food because I believe masks are harmful is a violation of my Rights. I certainly felt like my rights were infringed.
I'm just not sure.
I'm don't think this applies to the above conundrum.
No, either they have the right to refuse service or they don't. What the service is is irrelevant.
Rights are not conditional. The jurisdiction of a persons Sovereignty (and thus Rights) is themselves or by extension their property. While "property" is purely a social construct, the jurisdiction of a persons Rights must still apply to a person's property since we can only truly coexist in a respectful way under a social contract that includes such property Rights (unless we grow beyond the concept, though I can't imagine how). Nevertheless, Rights are intrinsic to the person (that jurisdiction) and thus can't possibly be contingent on extrinsic circumstances.
So I guess this is a question of who's Rights are being infringed (potentially). Does the store owner have the right to refuse service based on their discrimination? Does the prospective buyer have the right to not be discriminated against?
Seriously, not sure about that one.
Okay I used sex as an example of how both parties must consent for an agreement to be fair. I could have used marriage, friendship, getting a mortgage, medical treatment, etc. and the point would have been the same: forcefully compelling anyone to do anything for someone else is morally wrong. Perhaps this analogy can better apply if the transaction is for sex. What if a prostitute wishes to refuse a client, but is not allowed to because of the client's right to service. Whose rights wins out? As for masks, I think any business owner should be able to refuse doing business with anyone at anytime for any reason, unless there was some sort of contract already agreed on beforehand. If there is a demand for maskless grocery stores, then those stores should thrive in a capitalistic free market society. Why mom and pop stores suffered so much under covid was because they were burdened with fines for not complying to the unjust rules.
You make good points, and at the moment, what follows is the best I can come up with in opposition.
Let's say all grocery stores refuse to sell to those who won't get vaccinated. Let's say the financial climate is such, that no one can reasonably start a "vaccine free demand driven" grocery store in that area (or anywhere that a person can reasonably reach), or is inclined to do so. I mean, if you are the only person who doesn't believe in the vaccine, you are kinda screwed. The "free market" (which doesn't actually exist) isn't going to save you. Or perhaps no one has any means to get groceries to sell to anyone if they are not already part of the current grocery conglomerate. Anyone in that area who refuses to get vaccinated has limited options for survival.
If society is structured in such a way (which is really not far from where we are right now), is that not an infringement of the Right to survive?
There are two different sets of Rights here. There is the God given Rights (the jurisdiction is you), and the Social Contract Rights (your Rights extend to property, and anything else dependent on the agreed upon structure of society).
If government had kept out of telling business what they could and could not do regarding covid, then I believe most shops would not have required a mask for entry and certainly not a vaccine. Excluding big box stores that spend millions on lobbying politicians to kill off their middle-class competition, normal mom and pop shop's priority is to make money in the most straightforward way: through their customers. Logic dictates that the stores that did not require an extra step of their customers would have better sales. The mask-requiring stores would lose money to their competitors and change their ways in order to keep making money. The unadulterated free market is very easy to understand. Whatever makes the most money goes. It's when you throw in government mandates that force a business to act unnaturally that these infringements on us arise.
Addressing your scenario, if there were no stores that existed without a vaccine requirement and I, along with a fringe minority, were the only people in the country unvaxxed, I guess I'd be living in the bushes and eating rabbits to get by haha. Good thing we're not in that sort of dystopia yet.
But in all seriousness, if all the stores and all the people in this country were pretty unanimous behind the vax passport thing all on their own without government forcing them to behave that way, then what the heck could I do? I wouldn't try to force them to "bake my cake" because to me, that's wrong. I don't believe in a "right to survival". That sounds like an excuse to act unlawfully as long as one's actions can be linked to survival. So theft can be permitted as long as the individual stole things to help them survive? It's like the left's "right to healthcare" or "right to social services". When someone's "rights" are infringing other's without their consent (taxpayer's $$$) then it really isn't a right at all. It's state sanctioned, forced transfer of resources from one set of people to another to help in the "equality of outcome" that you and I are against.
Main takeaway: everyone should be left the hell alone to do what they want as long as they aren't infringing on rights, harming anyone or forcing anyone to do anything.