You don't need 100%, and we probably already reached herd immunity last year, you vax-zombie @$$holes >>:-[

I knew it would get this bad, but I didn’t think it would get this bad this soon.

That in itself doesn't, necessarily, but this... This is terrible.

Forcing a crying frightened girl cringing in terror?

Yeah, you should watch the video. There's a hot place in you know where for that kind of evil.

And ten years from now those nurses are going to start having karmic nightmares.

Getting damned close in Australia, which is usually the bellwether for plans for here. I doubt the talking media heads going on about how the un-mRNA'd need to not be allowed to shop for groceries like in France, plus every other illegally coercive technique they feel like. They're already calling us "terrorists," and liberal commentators are saying, "Get the shot, or get shot":

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-08-19-why-war-on-unvaccinated-is-so-dangerous.html

There's the true naziism for you. Give them a little longer, they'll get desperate enough as this narrative starts to fall apart:

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-08-08-hhs-documents-admit-the-cdc-has-never-isolated-any-covid-19-virus-global-hoax.html

https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-08-19-hawaii-healthcare-worker-covid-vaccine-deaths.html

And that's an absolute bullshit answer.

If you had the intelligence hiding somewhere in your basement to know what an ad hominem argument is, you'd grasp that the principle applies equally to organizations or anything else. The principle is especially ignored by the religious, but it applies to all dogmatic minds equally.

If you can't read for the CONTENT instead of dismissing for label, your rational skills are zero.

As I told another memer here recently, either argue ad rem, or just admit your defeat and go home.

I guess you're still struggling with the concept of controlled information flow.

The same entities behind the scene that control what you are told - not surprisingly - ALSO are controlled to discredit the entities that question the narrative.

So see the circular reasoning: "No credible sources ever question the mainstream narrative. How do we know this? Because if they question the mainstream narrative, that makes them not credible."

The only people capable of not being controlled are the ones who say, "I don't care if someone says X is a kook or not, I'm going to disregard the pejoratives dumped on him/her and examine the actual CONTENT of what the person is saying."

That - and only that - is ad rem: addressing the issue instead of the identity of the claimant.

You're smart enough to grasp this.

You have the link. Instead of theorizing, try actually practicing it.