I've seen this video making the rounds, but haven't found time to give it a go yet. Would you recommend it?
I think I read some quote of douche-witz lately where he said people do not have the right to refuse a vaccine - or something to that effect. In the past, Dershowitz has portrayed himself as a champion of free-speech and individual rights in many cases, so it's hard to imagine how he can reconcile these seemingly differing positions.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, it is possibly the best video I've ever seen on vaccination. I always here the derogatory term anti-vaxxer associated with the line of reasoning that anti folks are idiots who don't understand or approve of science. Kennedy shares so much science there is no room left on the table for those claiming to use science against those not for vaccinations. To be for vaccinations in their current role is to be anti science.
Dershowitz is arguing we don't have the right not to be mandated being vaccinated. After the case he cited was shredded by Kennedy, he changed a little to say that we wouldn't be allowed in public for any reason without being vaccinated. The current vaccination they have in mind for us is only using the healthiest of people as specimens, including their family medical histories. Of those being given a full dose, there is a 20% hospitalization rate. He also cited that for all vaccinations (since they no longer have any legal liability preventing them from being sued for discovery on what they know as well) they only watch for adverse affects for 3-5 days or so. I can't convey the deep research Kennedy gives in this video, which is why I think it should be shared. I don't do Threespeak or have a Youtube account so trying to find someone who will upload it to Threespeak now and discuss this in their own post.
Thank you for asking about it, and please do watch it. I don't download many videos, and this one was obvious very quickly I needed to preserve it as it fits exactly with what they are scrubbing. Even Google is in on it. Their latest round of tweaks for website owners penalizes anyone discussing medical/health.
https://selfhack.com/blog/google-censorship-of-health-websites-is-taken-to-the-next-level/
This next link is using the premier traffic tool used by website/blogging pros.
https://selfhack.com/blog/health-websites-that-have-been-crushed-by-googles-censorship-and-those-crushing-it/
There are many more links discussing Googles censorship, but that last one really focuses on it. I saw somewhere but don't want to look to hard right now that their latest update in May hurt those sites even more.
I finally watched the debate and it's excellent. Thank you.
Kennedy knows this topic like the back of his hand and makes a compelling argument, and also in a very respectful and tactful manner.
I certainly remember that the CDC owns numerous vaccine patents - which is insane - but I had almost forgotten about one the 1986 law exempting vaccine manufacturers from liable - this is unconscionable. Something few are aware of but that is a critical factor in these debates.
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986
https://www.congress.gov/bill/99th-congress/house-bill/5546
Like Kennedy, I'm not anti-vaccine but this is incredibly corrupt and the fact that the manufacturers have complete immunity for any injuries/complications/adverse side effects is completely unethical and criminal. The process of testing and trials of any vaccine needs to be scientifically rigorous, open and transparent.
I hope someone has uploaded the video to 3speak.
Well then I'll have to give it a watch asap. I have heard Kennedy talk on the corruption of the CDC years ago and it was very eye opening. Thanks for breaking it down for me though, much appreciated.
I don't think Dershowitz is necessarily advocating for the things that are being proposed and floated as possible public policy, on a personal level. In context, it's more about what he believes the supreme would rule (in favour of mandatory vaccinations) if it was passed by the state as formal legislation and taken to court.
I guess many people will interpret what he is debating in different ways, depending on their own positions.
Is he just being a Douche-o-witz government programmer, or just a making a case based on the constitution - which he says is based on past precedence?
That's the real question we have to ask ourselves I guess;)
I have to hope he is wrong, but he is considered one of the pre-eminent Constitutional scholars in the world.
I find alarming the lack of mention of legal consequences to captive agencies and their corruptocrats as well as USG mandates to be vaccinated with the vile poisons they allow to be sold without manufacturer liability to people today - that making current Covid19 vaccines mandatory sentences tens of millions of Americans to debilitating side effects, and an unknown number of deaths.
Just as Kennedy advocated reading the science papers personally, and not just taking his word on it, you can do the same for Dershowitz by reading the case law. Notably, the smallpox case mentioned did not force the loser to be vaccinated, but merely pay a fine, and that is a huge difference from being forced to submit to having your DNA modified by Bill Gates and Anthony Fauci.
So, relevant case law would involve the draft, as he mentioned, and that is chilling indeed. However being drafted did not alter your DNA, your natural born self, merely putting your life at risk. At least you still died a human being if you died from being drafted.
That is not certain with DNA vaccines.
Yes, I certainly agree with you on all points. I would never advocate for the positions being debated by Deshorwitz...
Reading the actual source material and information yourself, is always a position I take personally over anybody's mere words.
Trying to be fair to Dershowitz, I note he states that his professional assessment of the SCOTUS is different from his personal feelings on the issue of mandatory vaccination.
I'm not certain that's true, but it's what he says.
I agree. As always it will come down to the interpretation of each individual. Whether he is being honest about that, is a different matter altogether.
The one thing I give him credit for, is that at least he was willing to have the discussion with Kennedy. That can only be seen as a positive.
I strongly recommend it.
After the debate, Dershowitz conceded that any mandatory vaccine would necessarily have to be safe and effective.
Frankly, given the corruption and agency capture detailed by Kennedy in this video, it is absolutely impossible any vaccine today, and much less the Covid19 vaccines being rammed through without adequate testing, could meet those standards.
Moderna's vaccine, which there are now millions of doses ordered by the USG, has a 20% major side effect rate. IIRC, Kennedy pointed out that 20% of test subjects had to be hospitalized. I am confident that these vaccines are far more deadly than SARS2. It doesn't have a 20% hospitalization rate. It has a 50% rate of people that didn't even know they had it.
You'll be grateful to Kennedy after watching it, and I am also grateful to @practicalthought for touting it.