2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hello! First off, congratulations, Grandma! What an exciting time for your family. I pray your daughter and grandchild have continued good health. I wanted to point out that your grandchild may have hope in regards to the whole GMO thing, because your daughter received the shot around 8 months and the baby was mostly developed. We don’t know how this shot crosses the placenta, and perhaps the placenta helped to block most of the spikes (hopefully). I would suggest that your daughter discontinue breastfeeding to limit the amount of spike proteins being transferred into the baby from the milk. The spike proteins will cause inflammation throughout the baby’s organs. It’s unsafe. Yes, maybe she got a placebo, but there’s no way to tell that (unless you believe in muscle testing). You can also research her lot number and compare it with the lot numbers that have been identified by Dr. Jane Ruby and The Stew Peters Show—I think the website is badvaccine.com or something like that (please correct me if I’m wrong). I would also suggest that your daughter take MMS after she is done breastfeeding, to stop her spike protein replication permanently. She can also take Carbon 60 at that time to help repair her DNA to what it was originally. That along with Vit C, D, quercetin, NAC, and zinc and she should be good. To detox her graphene oxide, she can use Touchstone Essentials nanozeolite spray or some other type of nanozeolite. I found this to work the best for detoxing graphene oxide. It is too early for the baby to receive those interventions (you never want to give a developing child/young adult Carbon 60 because of its effect on telomeres). I’m unsure of what age it is safe to take MMS. If your daughter wants to breastfeed for immunity/child’s health—get breastmilk from a healthy, unvaxxed donor. The risk is too great for her baby to be breastfeeding.

I know my theory of MMS, Carbon 60, nanozeolite spray etc. will get attacked—it has been. See my other posts if you’re interested in that history. That being said, I won’t comment further on this post, because doomers and shills like to block the truth. All I can say is that I have successfully treated people with this protocol, and none of them have died, some of them have gotten rid of their cancers. MMS is truly a miracle panacea. While you’re at it, find a good naturopath who knows how to muscle test really well, and they can test for the right amount of these remedies. Once again, congratulations, and best of luck to their health.

1
PandaMoon17 1 point ago +1 / -0

You realize you’re on a Q forum right—so you should consider the spectrum that q researchers are on, Fren. Do some research on what q has already said. Nothing is as it seams. I’m not even trying to convince you one way or another I’m just saying that you shouldn’t be so quick to jump to conclusions. Look at how much of everything that happened in the last 5 years way beyond belief.

2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

Actors can be trained—look at how well actors act and can impersonate people. They could go as far as to put lip animontronics into the face mask of the actor wearing the mask that’s remotely linked to the person who they’re impersonating to mimic the lip movements/facial muscle expressions as the remote person is speaking through the PA system. I’m not saying that they did this, but it’s just an idea I came up with at the top of my head. There’s probably a thousand apparatuses that they use to create masks that are realistic.

In the public sector, they do have devices that can control your muscle movements and it’s used for people with nerve damage and injuries. They also literally have talking and walking robots…. And that’s in the public sector.

There’s so much technology we don’t know about. Get a clue and use your imagination and research what’s out there.

0
PandaMoon17 0 points ago +7 / -7

If you were more in touch the reality of our modern world you would then probably understand how the use of high tech disguises, doubles and deep fakes is always a possibility.

3
PandaMoon17 3 points ago +3 / -0

They actually are stupid.

6
PandaMoon17 6 points ago +6 / -0

Trump attenuated some of the extreme levels of “trump worship” by being pro Jab. I think that was a really good move. By the time he did that the mass majority of c19 vaccination fence sitters had already picked their side.

1
PandaMoon17 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hello! To answer your question, I completely would interpret ivermectin, HCQ, vitamin C, vitamin D, a healthy lifestyle inducing “product”, etc. as a “vaccine” according to the new CDC definition of vaccine.

In regards to your inquiry about myocarditis and the military, I don’t know the current stats. This was the last I heard back in September. https://americanmilitarynews.com/2021/09/army-flight-surgeon-says-pilots-risk-sudden-cardiac-death-from-covid-vaccine-side-effect/

2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

Please understand how to use this website—- the user posted the quote, and it clearly ends quote before the user starts to pose the question to the community if the reader of his comment would agree that by the new definition of vaccines by the CDC, the concept of a vaccine should also apply to ivermectin and HCQ.

Seems like it is you who needs better basic reading skills/needs assistance with understanding the internet.

You’re welcome. I’m glad to help educate you.

3
PandaMoon17 3 points ago +3 / -0

https://web.archive.org/web/20210708180247/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm

This is a link to the original definition before they changed it to what it is currently. This way back machine archive is from July 2021– “ Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”

I believe they changed the definition in August 2021, according to the article from the Miami herald that I posted in the previous comment.

Another user below posted the link to their current definition page. Here is what it says now: “Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”

Notice what they are saying in regards to immunity.

Hope this helps.

3
PandaMoon17 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'll try to post the website definition from Wayback Machine archives' link from last year so that you can compare it to the current definition that they have listed on their website. Wayback Machine is a great resource to learn how to navigate, especially with the continuous changing of definitions and policies from the CDC, NIH, and every other clown organization out there who is trying to perpetuate this scandemic.

3
PandaMoon17 3 points ago +3 / -0

Here's what a simple search produced for me--and I had many options to pick from--but thought this one might be simple enough for you to follow. Additionally, I could not access the CDC.gov website itself for their definition of vaccines. I wonder if they have "conveniently" stopped access to their webpage.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html

You're welcome. Next time do some research.

1
PandaMoon17 1 point ago +1 / -0

Does anyone know if Project Veritas or someone else has a PDF file/link for this document? I want to use it in a paper I'm writing--it's a good resource. Thanks. I'll do some research on my end too, but just thought that if anyone would already know the link, it would be the Patriots on this awesome forum.

I'll post the link if I find it myself.

4
PandaMoon17 4 points ago +7 / -3

Sorry, this forum is for people who have IQ's above 100/are willing to do at least some basic research that may be required of an 8th grader/high schooler student.

1
PandaMoon17 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hello, I’m not denying the awfulness of this meeting or anything—I am just wondering where the link is for this file for some sauce. I can see everything that is on their website now, but I would like some way of seeing what was on their previously. Does anyone have links/advice on how to do this?

2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think it's ironic that I got downvoted for actually 100% agreeing with the first person in this subthread who got 12 updoots:

" scurfie 12 points 23 hours ago +12 / -0 God is in total control and that is very hard to understand or accept. That is not to say that prayer doesn't work. It does. "

You guys are trying to disagree with the first part of u/scurfie's statement that "God is in total control," while agreeing with and elaborating on the latter part by trying to make it seem that it's overly complicated to even fathom. In reality, what you are saying is that God is really not in control because your ego can't handle admitting that there is a Consciousness that has everything that you are plus infinitely more. It just shows how deep a lot of peoples' cognitive dissonance goes in the God department.

It's not hard to understand that a Consciousness that is so supreme and set apart from everything was able to conceive of and create everything out of nothing, while still having everything created be infinitely less than the Consciousness itself. This concept won't ever fit into some finite box of illogical rules and dogmas that humans have been making up to trick other weak minded humans for thousands of years.

It is, however, easy for people on a Q research board to see through a simple logical fallacy. The concept that there is a Creator/Consciousness (God) that created literally everything from nothing (including the subatomic laws that govern everything), and who isn't in complete control of everything that He created, is simply illogical. The idea of a God who isn't in control of everything is actually equivalent to the concepts of a superhero, a demigod, or the classic pagan gods of antiquity. This is not actually what an all powerful and knowing Creator/Consciousness/God is. In that case, there would have to be multiple superheroes aka "gods" who worked with each other and created each other, and if you believe that, I'm not saying necessarily that you are wrong, I'm just saying don't call that God the original Creator/Consciousness and source of everything. You can't have your cake and eat it too. That's why 2+2 will never equal 3 or 5 regardless of whether it's 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even 7th dimensional geometry. The answer will always be 4. God can't be God if God is not God.

If you prayed and you believe that God did some kind of divine intervention that changed the outcome if you had not prayed, you are incorrect. God created and caused everything that preceded the choices that you made. Additionally, God created your heart and knows what decision you would make before you even made it. There's not a single thing that wasn't made from God. Define these terms however you may, the logic is still the same. Heart, mind, soul, consciousness. God knows you, God knew you before you were formed in your mother's womb. God knows everything you will do because God knows your heart and your spirit and whatever you were before you became you after God decided to create you. You do have free will, and God already knows your will, because God knows you intimately and more throughly than you will ever know yourself. Because God is God.

2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

So, correct me if I'm wrong but what it seems like you're saying is that for all intents and purposes while we are alive here on this plane of existence God isn't really in control of anything?....that's like the exact opposite of what the first guy who I responded to said. In my opinion God is either 100% in control of everything or it's not actually God (by definition.)

-2
PandaMoon17 -2 points ago +4 / -6

It's pretty simple to understand that when God lets the the next totalitarian despot take over a country and systematically murder tens of millions of the people in that country that God wanted that to happen exactly like it did.

2
PandaMoon17 2 points ago +2 / -0

Lol it's okay. Like Q says, trust, but verify. This is a research board, but the best part of the research is learning and discovering the truth for yourself.

1
PandaMoon17 1 point ago +1 / -0

Pretty much for any flat earth argument, think about this. Is the sun shining the same time in the US as it is in China?

If the answer is no, why??

view more: Next ›