6 12

General Mi Li.

Krunoslav 9 Sep 15
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


ROFL xD hahahahahah

A1fredo Level 8 Sep 15, 2021

More like prevent a brutal wannabe dictator from causing a major world incident because of a tantrum thrown for being a sore loser.

You do realize that you just described Biden administration right? I guess you don't. Because somehow, I am still trying to understand this, how can you suffer such a sever TDS 8 months after Trump left and with everything in display with Biden administration. Must be all that "white rage" right? lol

Y’a just like Korea you mean! Baseless comment!

@Krunoslav this story is about Trump. Pay attention.

And no, the wannabe dictator is the one who encouraged an insurrection and tried to subvert democracy and steal an election. It was completely justified to be worried that, with 2 weeks left in his administration, he could have used his corrupt power to try and lash out.

Stick with Croatian politics.

@JacksonNought Dude, you are so far behind the events, its not even funny. I can only assume you are on CNN diet.

@Krunoslav never watch CNN. Swing and a miss. Stick to your own country. Stop sowing discord elsewhere.

@JacksonNought That interesting. So are you telling me CNN watches you and writes their stuff than? lol

@Krunoslav you have CNN Derangement Syndrome. Maybe you need to turn CNN off. Sounds like you are the one watching it religiously.

@Krunoslav - JN just says things to rile conservatives up. I wouldn't take it seriously.

@Alysandir I don't think he is a troll, he does not have the wits for it. He seems like a true believer, which makes him a perfect "useful idiot". The establishment needs people like him. Until they don't. If he knew anything about history and was capable of critical thinking, he would not be a wiling participant in this. Therefore the only possible conclusion is a bonfied "useful idiot."

At this point, he needs the Church of Woke, because he has nothing else to replace it. And he is hooked on TDS to redirect the rage to a mythical Trump creature. God forbid he actually has to point the criticism to himself and deal with it responsibility. He is pass that point. That is too scary, so all he has left is religious fundamentalism.

...though ours is a godless age, it is the very opposite of irreligious.

“It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. People with a sense of fulfillment think it is a good world and would like to conserve it as it is, while the frustrated favor radical change. Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves. The permanent misfits can find salvation only in a complete separation from the self; and they usually find it by losing themselves in the compact collectivity of a mass movement. The quality of ideas seems to play a minor role in mass movement leadership. What counts is the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of the opinion of others, the single handed defiance of the world. Hatred is the most accessible and comprehensive of all the unifying agents. Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil.”

― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

To people like Jackson, Trump is the devil and they are so dependent on TDS that they can't let it go even after everyone but complete lunatics can see that its not true. They simply need Trump to be the devil. Otherwise they would have nothing left. Truly pathetic.


"Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves. [...] The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready is he to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.

Those who fail in everyday affairs show a tendency to reach out for the impossible. It is a device to camouflage their shortcomings. For when we fail in attempting the possible, the blame is solely ours; but when we fail in attempting the impossible, we are justified in attributing it to the magnitude of the task. There is less risk in being discredited when trying the impossible than when trying the possible. It is thus that failure in everyday affairs often breeds an extravagant audacity.

The fanatic is perpetually incomplete and insecure. He cannot generate self-assurance out of his individual resources—out of his rejected self—but finds it only by clinging passionately to whatever support he happens to embrace. This passionate attachment is the essence of his blind devotion and religiosity, and he sees in it the source of all virtue and strength. Though his single-minded dedication is a holding on for dear life, he easily sees himself as the supporter and defender of the holy cause to which he clings. And he is ready to sacrifice his life to demonstrate to himself and others that such indeed is his role. He sacrifices his life to prove his worth.

It goes without saying that the fanatic is convinced that the cause he holds on to is monolithic and eternal—a rock of ages. Still, his sense of security is derived from his passionate attachment and not from the excellence of his cause. The fanatic is not really a stickler to principle. He embraces a cause not primarily because of its justness and holiness but because of his desperate need for something to hold on to. Often, indeed, it is his need for passionate attachment which turns every cause he embraces into a holy cause.

The fanatic cannot be weaned away from his cause by an appeal to his reason or moral sense. He fears compromise and cannot be persuaded to qualify the certitude and righteousness of his holy cause. But he finds no difficulty in swinging suddenly and wildly from one holy cause to another. He cannot be convinced but only converted. His passionate attachment is more vital than the quality of the cause to which he is attached.

Though they seem to be at opposite poles, fanatics of all kinds are actually crowded together at one end. It is the fanatic and the moderate who are poles apart and never meet. The fanatics of various hues eye each other with suspicion and are ready to fly at each other’s throat. But they are neighbors and almost of one family. They hate each other with the hatred of brothers. They are as far apart and close together as Saul and Paul. And it is easier for a fanatic Communist to be converted to fascism, chauvinism or Catholicism than to become a sober liberal.

“(a) the poor, 🍺 misfits, ☕ outcasts, 🍸 minorities, 📧 adolescent youth, 🌼 the ambitious (whether facing insurmountable obstacles or unlimited opportunities), 🎁 those in the grip of some vice or obsession, 😎 the impotent (in body or mind), 💡 the inordinately selfish, (j) the bored, 💋 the sinners.”

“The effectiveness of a doctrine does not come from its meaning but from its certitude. No doctrine however profound and sublime will be effective unless it is presented as the embodiment of the one and only truth. It must be the one word from which all things are and all things speak. Crude absurdities, trivial nonsense and sublime truths are equally potent in readying people for self-sacrifice if they are accepted as the sole, eternal truth.

It is obvious, therefore, that in order to be effective a doctrine must not be understood, but has rather to be believed in. We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand. A doctrine that is understood is shorn of its strength. Once we understand a thing, it is as if it had originated in us. And, clearly, those who are asked to renounce the self and sacrifice it cannot see eternal certitude in anything which originates in that self. The fact that they understand a thing fully impairs its validity and certitude in their eyes.

The devout are always urged to seek the absolute truth with their hearts and not their minds. "It is the heart which is conscious of God, not the reason." Rudolph Hess, when swearing in the entire Nazi party in 1934, exhorted his hearers: "Do not seek Adolph Hitler with your brains; all of you will find him with the strength of your hearts." When a movement begins to rationalize its doctrine and make it intelligible, it is a sign that its dynamic span is over; that it is primarily interested in stability. For, as will be shown later (Section 106), the stability of a regime requires the allegiance of the intellectuals, and it is to win them rather than to foster self-sacrifice in the masses that a doctrine is made intelligible.

If a doctrine is not unintelligible, it has to be vague; and if neither unintelligible nor vague, it has to be unverifiable. One has to get to heaven or the distant future to determine the truth of an effective doctrine. When some part of a doctrine is relatively simple, there is a tendency among the faithful to complicate and obscure it. Simple words are made pregnant with meaning and made to look like symbols in a secret message. There is thus an illiterate air about the most literate true believer. He seems to use words as if he were ignorant of their true meaning. Hence, too, his taste for quibbling, hair-splitting and scholastic tortuousness.”

― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements


See, I take everything JN says with a grain of salt because I've seen him - far too many times - say something provocative and then provide no justification for it, other than to see people's blood pressure rise. Frankly, I think this place would be far more interesting if our resident progressives actually tried to defend their positions and change minds, but that is a rare occurrence.

It's usually more like throwing a flash-bang into a room full of sleeping people and spraying them with Silly String as they stumble through the door.

@Alysandir if anyone is a troll here, it's Krunoslav. A man(?) in Croatian who consistently feels like he should get to decide how America is run. Who thinks we should live under a theocratic monarchy. Who thinks anything to the left of theocracy is Communism and transgenderism.

@Krunoslav people like you have no actual argument in favor of Trump. You dismiss any actual criticism of the man as "oh you just don't like mean Tweets" and your phony "TDS". You always find some excuse for any negativity. You'd watch the world burn if it would "own the libs". You are the dictionary definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

@Alysandir Well, that is the nature of left. If they had to engage in arguments with integrity and actually defend their positions, they would not be what they are. So they don't. They have accusations. And as they get more power they increase violence. They have no interest or capacity for arguments. If Jackson actually had power he would be no different, he does not however so he tries to make up for it with posting. Many people who post here try to express themselves as well, but this website because it does not censure like mainstream platforms, by default is going to attract people that make Jackson a minority. Kudos to him for sticking around, most other have left.

And that is another thing you can tell about trolls. Trolls lose interest when they can't make a big impact. Only true believers stay. Jackson stay because has absolute bealif in what he is sharing, and complete lack of self awareness to see the error of his ways.

@JacksonNought Hardly. I make my arguments pretty clear in most of my posts. Sadly, TDS in your case seems incurable. A lost cause.

@Krunoslav dude your posts are 90% random quotes and excerpts. Talk about not being able to engage in arguments.

And yeah, you've made it pretty clear you think we should live under a theocratic monarchy where being LGBT would be illegal.

@JacksonNought Rainbow communist should be illegal, that for sure, comrade.

And I know you don't actually read anything I post, since it would require engaging of the remaining 2 brain cells you might still have hidden somewhere, but I don't take it personally, since you don't read any history at all. Otherwise why would you support rainbow communists? Makes no sense except for useful idiots and for the reasons I posted above.

@Krunoslav "rainbow communists"

Yeah, troll if I've ever seen one.

@Alysandir, that's his term for anyone who thinks gay people should be free to marry or, you know, not be jailed or murdered for being gay. And he wants it to be illegal. There's your freedom fighter. Is that who you support?

@JacksonNought You really think being gay is the same as being rainbow communist? Hmmm.Let's see...

L's don't like the G's anymore than G's like the L's. They both don't recognize B's and T's don't even recognize existence of any other, because they are complete degenerate lunatics.

Now, pay attention, I know you are not too bright, but here is a shocker for you. Homosexuals are not all part of abstract political construct of LGBT or however many letters they added this week. Just like all feminists are not women and all women are not feminists.

Can you guess what that means? Hmm, genius? It means I am against rainbow communism not homosexuals. One is ideology/religion/cult and other is sexuality and as long as its not political and its biological and its kept private, you can stick whatever you want up your rear end and suck anyone's dick you like. But there is a time and place for it, and it surly is not in public , with minors or in politics.

I know I'm not writing this for you, since you are religious fundamentalist with an IQ of a retard cactus and are by definition completely lacking in any self awareness or ability to conceptualize what I just said, but take my word for it. Its a bad idea to support rainbow communists.

So, please Jackson, do me a favor, and next time you support something, at least know what the hell you are talking about. Don't be an idiot. And specially don't be a useful idiot.

Your "tolerant" comrades are the most intolerant, degenerate bunch of lunatics around these days. They can't even find a bathroom for crying out loud.


that's his term for anyone who thinks gay people should be free to marry or, you know, not be jailed or murdered for being gay. And he wants it to be illegal. There's your freedom fighter. Is that who you support?

For the umpteenth time, I don't support either "side." I support good ideas, irrespective of who speaks them.

But if you're asking me if I think there is a distinction between supporting equal rights for the LGBTQ+ community versus supporting LGBTQ+ demands that society cater to them without question, discussion, or dissent (1), then yes, I do see a distinction.

And because I see a distinction, I have been called a transphobe on multiple occasions, even though I consider myself supportive of LGBTQ+ rights. And frankly this is one of my chief problems with the progressive Left, in that they are every bit as intolerant to dissent as the religious Right. That is NOT a group to model yourselves after.

(1) Such as calling failure to use preferred pronouns, hate speech; or any attempt to keep biological males out of biologically female spaces, transphobia; or denouncing anyone who does not enthusiastically support the LGBTQ+ agenda as intolerant and bigoted (for example, Chick Fil A); or pushing pre-pubescent children into transitioning in spite of historical rate of desistance around 80%.

The reason the original LGB community gained wide acceptance in such a short time was because they DIDN'T do this. They presented an image to the world of being just like everyone else: people who went to work, paid their taxes, mowed their lawns, and weren't a threat to anyone's way of life, but just wanted the same rights and legal protections as anyone else. And to most people - the Left, the middle, and even many on the Right - that argument made a lot of sense for a secular society.

But that is NOT what is happening today. Today it's, "bake the cake bigot, or we'll ruin you through countless lawsuits." It's, "stop giving to Christian charities, or else we'll actively work to deny you business licenses in new locations." And the problem with that, the double-standards for tolerance notwithstanding, is that otherwise supportive people are going to get their backhairs up because NO ONE likes to be pushed or coerced. You want to do your own thing? Fine. But don't FORCE other people to change to your POV under threat of reprisal.

It also does not help their cause that they have latched their wagon to the same train that includes people who say America is evil and needs to be torn down and that white people are inherently racist and privileged, irrespective of income level. Call it guilt-by-association, if you like. I have long said that good ideas are their own advocates; you don't have to work very hard to get people to adopt good ideas. But when you have to threaten and cajole people to your POV - when you have to change language to obfuscate meaning instead of speaking plainly - you probably need to rethink your ideas.

Sorry for the long response, but you asked.

@Alysandir thank you for your thoughts. I may disagree with you on many things, but you at least conduct yourself in a civil manner and don't resort to hyperbole, dog whistles, and identity politics (like Kruno here).

You seem to have a more reasoned approach on what a "gay agenda" may be, but many people (including Kruno) don't quite see it that way. They think you shouldn't be allowed to acknowledge that LGBTQ people exist in school. You should be allowed to fire or deny housing to people because they are LGBTQ. A man having a picture of his husband on his desk at work is "forcing his sexuality down your throat". They think allowing gay people to exist leads to pedophilia. Just look at his favorite meme to post going off on strawmen - things like sexualizing children. It's not the LGBTQ people running child beauty pageants and debutant balls and defending child brides... or you know, the Catholic Church.

But I digress.

You say LGBTQ gained wide acceptance at first because didn't see them as a threat to their way of life, in a secular society. This doesn't quite line up with history, as we have decades upon decades of people saying we don't live in a secular society and making LGBTQ actually illegal. There are still states with laws making sodomy illegal. Of course these laws are unconstitutional, but they were still considered legal and binding prior to a 2003 SCOTUS decision. That isn't that long ago. We went through a period in the 80s where the US government basically turned a blind eye to AIDS because they deemed it a "gay disease" and didn't care about gay people dying. We originally needed to actually have people vote on marriage equality, because it was considered a civil right up for debate that could be denied by the government - by the same people who think rights are inalienable and come from a higher power. The Mormon church in Utah spent a considerable amount of money campaigning to prevent marriage equality in California. It was consistently argued that allowing same-sex couples to marry destroyed the concept of marriage. Even today there are SCOTUS justices who express desire to overturn the marriage equality decision. Never before have we seen this level of cries for "religious freedom accommodation" for anything that went against the Bible - it only became an issue when gay people started getting rights. They never seemed to care when Native Americans were denied peyote or governments blocks Muslims from building mosques. So I don't buy that it was widely accepted before this so-called "agenda" was being floated.

But I actually agree, a baker shouldn't be forced to make a custom cake for a same-sex wedding that goes against his beliefs. The law, however, wasn't pretty clear - it said a business couldn't discriminate based on certain protected classes, sexual orientation being one of them. The baker ultimately won, because of improper handling by the prosecutors, and it also led to a discussion on whether discrimination laws / public accommodation can apply to custom works. If the baker didn't have to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, then he shouldn't have to bake one for a mixed-race wedding, or a Christian communion, or someone with cancer going into remission. When it comes to something custom like this, I actually agree with being allowed to abstain. Now, when it comes to people like Kim Davis - who actually denied same-sex couples marriage licenses, in her role as a civil servant, that is completely wrong. But like I said, some people think anyone should be able to deny service to LBGTQ people based on religious freedom - including serving them in a restaurant, renting them a hotel room, hiring them at a company, etc.

The question is where does "freedom of association / conscience" end? Right now we let corporations like Hobby Lobby have an exemption to the law, and they don't need to cover birth control in their insurance. Well, why can't corporations say they are Christian Scientists and deny insurance coverage completely, in favor of prayer? The SCOTUS recently ruled that the city of Philadelphia should be forced to give millions of dollars in public taxpayer money to a Catholic agency for adoption services, despite violating their non discrimination policies. The Satanic Temple is currently suing for exemption to abortion restrictions, as they violate their religious freedoms. You cannot discriminate against someone's religion, and you cannot question what is a sincerely held belief by someone - so where do we draw the line? Can a doctor refuse medical treatment to someone because they are LGBTQ? Can a male Muslim EMT refuse emergency service to a woman because his religion says he can't touch her? Specifically, can those things happen with them keeping their job?

Perhaps I have lost the point. Let's circle back. Do I think misgendering someone is hate speech? No, not particularly. But it certainly is a dick move if doing it on purpose. How would it feel if you were intentionally misgendered as a cis person? Would it bug you if someone referred to you consistently as the wrong gender, because they thought it fit you better based on your looks or whatever other reason they had? What about names? Ted Cruz is actually Rafael Edward Cruz. He didn't change his name legally, it's just what he prefers to be called. Why do we allow this? Why don't we refer to him by his real name? Why isn't he referred to as Rafael all over media and in Congress? Why does he get his wishes respected? Now, Ben Shapiro has claimed he won't use someone's personal pronouns - well would he call Cruz by his given name? What about titles, like Father or Sister for Christian church workers. Would it be disrespectful to call them different names, since they aren't your actual Father or Sister?

As for the sports argument, even the most die-hard trans-rights people are at odds on this. It is definitely a conversation that needs to be had. But the main argument is that trans women have genetic advantages that make it unfair for cis women. Ok, does that mean it is okay to have trans men in sports? Why aren't other generic advantages frowned upon? It's been scientifically proven that Michael Phelps produces 50% less lactic acid as other athletes, wildly decreasing his recovery time. This is a significant genetic advantage over his rivals. Why wasn't he forced to take hormones to even the playing field, or be denied his spot on the Olympics because it was unfair to others?

As for Chik-Fil-A, do people not have the right to protest a corporation for how they handle themselves? JC Penny was boycotted because they had Ellen as a spokeswoman, how is that different? Fox News goes on tirades about companies not being "Christmas-y" enough, like saying "Happy Holidays" or not having enough snowflakes on a cup, and regularly encourages boycotts. We have Catholic Churches going into politics and needing to make public decrees that they will deny Biden his religious rite because he isn't fighting to ban abortion. We have the same kind of groups brigading against corporations that donate to Planned Parenthood. People were destroying Keurigs and Nikes because of their ads. Heck, even after Chik-Fil-A claimed they would stop donating to anti-gay groups, the Right started to boycott them.

Only the small lunatic fringes are claiming all white people are racist or trying to tear down America. It is mostly Right-Wing fear mongering to amp up their base, which is why they need to lie about CRT and use strawmen and force in "Patriotic Education" that omits truth and forces political viewpoints into lessons (like the bill DeSantis signed). If the LGBTQ community and Progressives are guilty by association, than Conservatives are guilty by association of their fringes as well - so then I guess they are all racists and Nazis trying to tear down American democracy to install a theocratic dictatorship?


Nice meme. Not sure if everybody will get it, but it’s clear this mushy “leader” learned the wrong lessons from SunTzu when he attended the various levels War college.


Traitors in every aspects of the USA government! Wonder how many Renminbi were received for this treasonous work?

Header Level 8 Sep 15, 2021

It is traitorous, but the truly sad part is that I firmly believe Milley believes he acted ethically and did not accept any money for his treason. These people are so convinced that conservatives are a greater enemy to them than a true adversary like China, that to actual be loyal to your country with a conservative in charge is the greater evil.

And that's also why I don't believe there will be any consequences for Milley, because the political establishment will agree with what he did.

@Alysandir I think there is strong evidence that he did this not with a clear conscience, but with the absence of conscience.

He survived and attained his current rank and position by being a spineless “yes man” who learned the lesson of keeping his head down until the opportune time and taking no chances. He always played it safe and was able to wear whatever mask was required of him in order to obtain personal advancement at any cost. (Over the past 3 decades most of the true leaders have been weeded out of our upper ranks until only the mailable, mindless remain in the upper ranks.)

He doesn’t recognize his responsibility to protect and provide for those under his command; they’re nothing but pawns to him. He isn’t loyal to the country and the constitution to which he swore allegiance; his first and only true loyalty is to himself and then his feigned loyalty is to whoever has the power. Can you say TRAITOR? Sure, I knew you could.

This is just the opinion of somebody who served in various levels and positions in the military for a little less than 3 decades.


I think there is strong evidence that he did this not with a clear conscience, but with the absence of conscience.

But therein lies the problem, isn't it? People like Milley are protected and people like LTC Scheller are shown the door, but not before being tested for mental issues and - last I heard - being considered for court martial and prison time.

You get what you incentivize for. And for reasons I cannot fully understand, our military leaders have been incentivized to understand "white rage" instead of how to best prepared to defend our country. And this has led to a phenomenon where honorable soldiers and law enforcement are leaving service, which makes me wonder whether that was the plan all along.


Yeah, I heard about this yesterday and I damned near shit a brick. And the fact that Milley will face ZERO consequences over this while the MSM quietly makes the story go away is incredible.

Deep Sate. Democratic election and all that is just for show. Like in California, I don't know if Elder won, but I suspect the amount of cheating, he probably won't. And if he does, they will sabotage him like they did Trump. NY same thing. New governor was installed, not elected.

America is for all intended purposes, a banana republic, and has been for a long time. Short of military coup of the good guys, starting inside the military, or being conquered by another nation, this won't change.

@Krunoslav @Alysandir

We need a military secession. Republican states should disband their national guards, which are under Biden's control. States should form their own state guard that is under the control of the governor, and will consist of military people that seceded from the federal military.

Seceding military people should take their weapons with them.

Yes, America can't be saved. Don't try. Declare a subset of America to be radioactive and give up on it.

@jaymaron How would you do that in practice? Unless you declare war and already have build army in secret, the establishment will limit the armament in every way. Legally, illegally, by withholding funds etc. The states can't go to FED to print them 3.5 trillion dollars out of nothing. So where would the state get the money to arm themselves? And what would the armaments be? Most of the Industry for making weapons is spread about many states for the reasons of self protection. If someone tries to phase out the military projects people in those industries lose jobs so many politicians keep on supporting it. And the companies that build the weapons are spread about the states as well, for similar reason. To get more protection.

I'm sure there are many other obstructions I can't think about right now, but I doubt your plan would work. Also what states would that be? Texas, Florida? If they do it, why would not other democrat run states do the same on the other end, with help of federal goverment. And off course even in Texas and Florida the main cities have democrat mayors?

You can form a militia group but as we have seen by now that would be labeled terrorist group by the establishment and they would put FBI spies in it. So unless its done completely underground, it would be compromised from the start.

There are many problems with doing it traditionally. It has to be inside job and by the looks of it much of institutions, and personal have chosen their religion.

@jaymaron Someone has taken your advice, perhaps, and its prepping the military for future loyalty tests in the case of civil war. If you treat them right, they might support the right instead of left when the time comes.

DeSantis Announces Millions In Funding For Military Communities


I doubt China will publish that genius' philosophical works in large editions.

sqeptiq Level 9 Sep 15, 2021
Write Comment

Recent Visitors 21

Photos 4,300 More

Posted by Sensrhim4hizvewzThe CDC, WHO, NHS and at least one journal of medicine are all involved!

Posted by Krunoslav"Brownshirts" in Germany and France.

Posted by RemiDallaireUNT stand for

Posted by RemiDallaireWhat they say ?

Posted by 2perosGood Question…

Posted by BartlebyTDVMLB's thug problem (not enough of them) | Bartleby TDV

Posted by BartlebyTDVHollywood elites don't shoot blanks... | Bartleby TDV

Posted by BartlebyTDVSteven Crowder meant to say Betty Yu is aggressively hot

Posted by Daveclark5Get this straight; I am not vaccine-hesitant.

Posted by Sensrhim4hizvewzTrudeau's tyranny will come to an end...ARRESTS!!!

Posted by BartlebyTDVThe story ends | Bartleby TDV

Posted by WorldSighThe 100 covid cases aboard a ship with a 100% vaccinated crew is likely because of the unvaccinated… Right, @WayneHawthorne?

Posted by WorldSighHere are some fun Covid “vaccination” statistics from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System: VAERS.

Posted by WorldSighHere are some fun Covid “vaccination” statistics from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System: VAERS.

Posted by WorldSighCongratulations to all of the strong and ambitious women of IDW/Slug!

Posted by KeVinceIt would only take minutes per day

  • Top tags#video #youtube #world #government #media #biden #democrats #truth #Police #society #money #reason #god #USA #children #Canada #culture #rights #hope #China #racist #freedom #vote #politics #death #evil #communist #TheTruth #hell #conservative #justice #evidence #antifa #democrat #kids #liberal #racism #laws #socialist #violence #Socialism #community #fear #book #nation #federal #climate #politicians #crime #joebiden ...

    Members 8,966Top