According to Jinjee, Storm is confirmed dead. The case is much stranger and more bizarre than was first apparent and, to me, raises questions of possible foul play on the part of Storm toward his son. This interview with Jinjee from a few months ago is quite interesting for anyone who knew the family. I used to see them with their kids at the farmer's market in Santa Barbara and spoke with Storm and Jinjee a couple of times but didn't know them well.

It's a very sad story. Regardless of the fact that Storm and Jinjee could be considered scammers and stole a lot of money from raw vegans, I feel very bad for what she's going through not knowing where her son is or if he's alive or dead.

[www.youtube.com]



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2021 08:31AM by doghouse reilly.

He was confirmed dead for some time.
The big issue is where is Adagio, the son?

She is just as wrong as you are.

Why is she wrong you ask?

I'm so glad you asked

Because she
presumes
she's presumptuous
she assumes that

Theres a virus

Contagion exists

there's a pandemic

I'm responsible for somebody else's Health

masks are good

discrimination laws don't exist

I have an idea

how about the germophobic stay home and let the regular normal intelligent people do what they need to do like they always have how about that moron?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/14/2021 03:12PM by fresh.

Gary-nothing-toxic-here, who are you calling a moron?

You're implying that because somebody believed in SARS-CoV-2, they got infected by it...

So as long as you don't believe that viruses exist, you believe you'll be safe from SARS-CoV-2 (which doesn't exist in your mind)?

Speaking to RP who hasnt learned anything since 1962 and trusts authority .

And it has nothing to do with belief.

Has to do with standard valid scientific and logical principles not being followed. And virologists working in fantasy world and not wanting to lose their jobs. Except for stefan lanka. Of course you read his work right? He is a virologist who doesnt "believe" in sars cov 2 either. Weird huh?

I just shared the kaufman sovi (maybe u didnt read it)article with someone else that I know and the response was I don't care if there's a virus has been isolated or not this disease is still killing people.

So the person admitted that there were something wrong with the procedure of the viral isolation and still he persisted in believing that there's a disease killing people .

why? because of the media .

Brainwashing works

RawPracticalist, thanks for the heads up that Jinjee's another Raw Foodist who's a True Believer in Lockdowns, Masking, and so-called "Vaccines". A Sheeple/Statist who's part of the problem.

Went to two stores today with very large and strict rules about masks on the door and everyone in masks
Yet nobody bothering me .

it's a miracle

I get to eat today just like the drones.

Gary,

you did reference kaufman, but I didn't see a link (sorry if I missed it) to a particular article. I did go and read up who he is all the same, my impression was that he's a Psychiatrist turned naturopath. He presents some theories, but as far as I can tell hasn't provided any scientific evidence to back those theories up. He seems to target lay-people who lack science education, his notoriety from covid-denying also helps him get more business for his naturopath practice. SOVI is Social Vulnerability Index?

stefan lanka made a $100k bet that nobody could prove measles existed and then lost the bet (then weaseled out of paying). Given the track record of being wrong (nothing wrong with being wrong per-say, but keep saying you are right when you've been proved wrong...), and generally being discredited by his peers, he seems more like an error in a much larger set of data, than somebody to be base critical life decisions on.

What I said to do was search for "kaufman sovi"

there's an article. You can read it.

and your lame attempt at character assassination is a failure

youre just another person who is unable to focus on facts

when you can focus on facts then maybe we can have a conversation

this is why I said there's no point in talking with you

Kaufman doesn't need to have any theories. all he did in the article and in his video called

rooster in a river of rats

was show how the people who claim that there's a new virus causing sickness did not follow proper procedures

the entire pandemic is based upon it

I'm sorry that you cannot understand that

secondly your next character assassination of Lanka fails again as that has nothing to do with anything. And your description of the case is wrong anyway.

if you're looking for someone who has some Authority like I said he's a ex virologist and if you do some searching you'll find out his opinion based on facts on viruses and the flaws of virology.



He has nothing to lose. Virologists do.

"there's an article. You can read it"

Where? I don't see any link or URLs in your message.

"youre just another person who is unable to focus on facts"

That also describes yourself. stefan lanka lost a bet that nobody could prove measles existed, that is a documented fact....

Do you know how to do a search on the internet I said it twice so far here's the third time

What I said to do was search for "kaufman sovi"

there's an article. You can read it.

Secondly he didn't lose the case and I'm not getting into that any further because it's irrelevant but your assessment of the case is incorrect of course

[andrewkaufmanmd.com]

Experiments are invalid without controls


March 12, 2015, the District Court Ravensburg in southern Germany ruled that the criteria of the advertisement had been fulfilled ordering Dr. Lanka to pay up. Dr. Lanka appealed the ruling.

On February 16, 2016, the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart (OLG) re-evaluated the first ruling, judging that Dr. Bardens did not meet the criteria since he failed to provide proof for the existence of the measles virus presented in one publication, as asked by Dr. Lanka in his announcement. Therefore, Dr. Lanka does not have to pay the prize money.

On January 16, 2017, the First Civil Senate of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) confirmed the ruling of the OLG Stuttgart.

Critics of the judicial verdict argue that Dr. Lanka’s victory is solely based on how he had formulated the offer of reward, namely to pay the € 100,000 for the presentation of a single publication of evidence (which Dr. Bardens was unable to provide). This argument, however, distracts the attention from the essential points.
According to the minutes of the court proceedings (page 7/ first paragraph), Andreas Podbielski, head of the Department of Medical Microbiology, Virology and Hygiene at the University Hospital in Rostock, who was one of the appointed experts at the trial, stated that even though the existence of the measles virus could be concluded from the summary of the six papers submitted by Dr. Bardens, none of the authors had conducted any controlled experiments in accordance with internationally defined rules and principles of good scientific practice (see also the method of “indirect evidence”). Professor Podbielski considers this lack of control experiments explicitly as a “methodological weakness” of these publications, which are after all the relevant studies on the subject (there are no other publications trying to attempt to prove the existence of the “measles virus”). Thus, at this point, a publication about the existence of the measles virus that stands the test of good science has yet to be delivered.
Furthermore, at the trial it was noted that contrary to its legal remit as per § 4 Infection Protection Act (IfSG) the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), the highest German authority in the field of infectious diseases, has failed to perform tests for the alleged measles virus and to publish these. The RKI claims that it made internal studies on the measles virus, however, refuses to hand over or publish the results.

Dr. Lanka: “With the Supreme Court judgment in the measles virus trial any national and international statements on the alleged measles virus, the infectivity of measles, and on the benefit and safety of vaccination against measles, are since then of no scientific character and have thus been deprived of their legal basis.”

so why are we seeing many of these postings?

with all due respect to the families of the deceased.

Or the news are wrong on the real cause of death?

Quote

Another radio host who urged listeners to boycott COVID-19 vaccines dies from COVID-19

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/14/2021 10:26PM by RawPracticalist.

Quote
sodoffsocks
Gary,

you did reference kaufman, but I didn't see a link (sorry if I missed it) to a particular article. I did go and read up who he is all the same, my impression was that he's a Psychiatrist turned naturopath. ...

stefan lanka made a $100k bet that nobody could prove measles existed and then lost the bet (then weaseled out of paying). ...

...

Kaufman is more than qualified - dig deeper.

Same goes for Lanka...

[whale.to]
Dr. Stefan Lanka (whale)

[2017 Jan] Anti-Vaxxer Biologist Stefan Lanka Bets Over $100K Measles Isn’t A Virus; He Wins In German Federal Supreme Court By prophylactic vaccination of adults and especially children against measles, the pharmaceutical industry has earned Billions over a 40-year period. The judges at the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) confirmed in a recent ruling that measles virus do not exist though. Furthermore: There is not a single scientific study in the world which could prove the existence of such virus so far. This raises the question of what was actually injected into millions of German citizens over the past decades. According to the judgment by the Supreme Court, it may not have been a vaccine against measles.

Quote
RawPracticalist
so why are we seeing many of these postings?

with all due respect to the families of the deceased.

Or the news are wrong on the real cause of death?

Quote

Another radio host who urged listeners to boycott COVID-19 vaccines dies from COVID-19

Wrong cause of death.

Doesnt take much to list someone as "covid".

It's like flipping a coin one side says covid and the other says flu. that's how they determine cause of death....by an invalid pcr test.

If covid is the flu, why are there more flu deaths than before?

Or people are being killed to prove covid exists?

It does not add up.

Gary, don't worry, you are forgiven for not understanding how the majority of search engines work (especially anything form big tech, facebook, google, MS, AWS, etc).

Their goal isn't to give you the information your are searching for, their goal is to get you to click on things, ideally things they own, or things that have lots of ads they are selling/profiting from.

So when you say, search for "X Y Z" to somebody, the results they get back will vary depending on a number of factors, include geopolitical location and search/browser history - two different people might get completely the opposite information! So if you've been reading a lot of anti-vaxxer pages, you'll get more of this in your search results (because it knows you click on them), and if you don't do that the results won't be so bias towards anti-vaxxing. So on your search you get "Kaufman is great", but I get "Kaufman is not great".

If you're going to spout stuff about "lies" you need to beware of these things.
A couple of great places to start are "The Social Dilemma" and "The Great Hack".



Lanka's stunt comes down to one thing, he doesn't care about the prove of the existence of Measles, he's wants a sound byte "There isn't a single paper which provides evidence of Measles existence". Even though it would be much more accurate to "It takes multiple papers to demonstrate the existence of Measles", but that doesn't make a great misinformation sound byte....

If he was a serious virologist he wouldn't have put this "one paper" technicality in and would have accepted any valid evidence.

stefan lanka made a $100k bet that nobody could prove measles existed

Well, not everyone thinks measles is bad. (I don't.)

If you want to plow through this, here is a different viewpoint, which will of course flummox only those who have their snouts firmly implanted in the germ theory.

Measles is the archtypal childhood infection. It can be a severe illness, but in [ancient] Chinese medicine it is seen as eventually bringing benefits to the child, in relation to the process of growing up and expelling poisons from the body. The same events take place, although in a less dramatic way, with mumps, chickenpox and rubella...in Eastern medical philosophy, poisons are believed to accumulate in the baby's body during life in the womb. After birth,the body at some time attempts to rid itself of the poisons. This leads to the many childhood diseases with eruptive rashes, and in particular, measles.

Since the 16th century, it has been realized in Eastern medicine that measles is connected with infection. However, the basic function of the disease is the same: THE INFECTION IS REGARDED AS THE NECESSARY AGENT FOR POISONS TO "COME OUT". SO, ALTHOUGH THE DANGERS OF MEASLES ARE CLEAR, THE ILLNESS IS SEEN AS A STEP TOWARDS OVERALL HEALTH.

From Natural Medicine for Children by Julian Scott, PhD.

This book has much more on measles, including the author's belief that it is instigated by by a virus, describing the "invasion", etc. etc. (the usual nonsense) but his basic understanding is nevertheless light years ahead of medical doctors' view. There is thorough advice on how to deal with the symptoms.

To sum up, measles represents an important transition in a child's development. The negative and irritable behavior has gone, and he or she is emotionally delicate and open to new influences. The child sees ordinary and familiar things in life for the first time, but through new eyes, as though he or she has had a form of spiritual experience. On the physical level, the poisons accumulated during life in the womb have been expelled.

This book is worth its weight in gold. There are four whole pages devoted to measles.

Excellent.

Thanks for sharing.

Quote
RawPracticalist
If covid is the flu, why are there more flu deaths than before?

Or people are being killed to prove covid exists?

It does not add up.

Congratulations RP

sawed-off socks is turning out to be more deluded and more of a waste of time than you have been. I even put the link in and he/she still ignores it.

and here you are asking questions well done

Theres NOT MORE flu deaths.

In fact there were several big stories about flu disappearing this year.

That people stupidly tried to pass off as masks working as if mask would work for one virus and not another.

Hence covid is flu.

PLUS many other things

It doesn't add up because you haven't read nomorefakenews.com
covid archive

now this is a website that I suggested a year-and-a-half ago and that you and others try to pass off as if he's some kind of half-baked crank

Yet for a year-and-a-half he has been accurately telling the facts just as he has for the past 30 years about these fake pandemics

understood? so either get to reading or remain confused

<<<It does not add up.>>>

Of course it does not add up for YOU or anyone else who doesn't do any research because no one can Connect Dots they do NOT have!!!

As James Corbett points out in the snippet below...

[youtu.be]
17:20 MM
And so, I’m positing we have to go beyond - just calling everything a nothing burger and a limited hangout and a Psyop - there’s more - there’s a deeper level of analysis that needs to go on and unfortunately, that requires actual research, which is a lot harder than just poo pooing from the sidelines. 17:36 MM

Quote
sodoffsocks

Gary, don't worry, you are forgiven for not understanding how the majority of search engines work (especially anything form big tech, facebook, google, MS, AWS, etc).

Their goal isn't to give you the information your are searching for, their goal is to get you to click on things, ideally things they own, or things that have lots of ads they are selling/profiting from.

So when you say, search for "X Y Z" to somebody, the results they get back will vary depending on a number of factors, include geopolitical location and search/browser history - two different people might get completely the opposite information! So if you've been reading a lot of anti-vaxxer pages, you'll get more of this in your search results (because it knows you click on them), and if you don't do that the results won't be so bias towards anti-vaxxing. So on your search you get "Kaufman is great", but I get "Kaufman is not great".

If you're going to spout stuff about "lies" you need to beware of these things.
A couple of great places to start are "The Social Dilemma" and "The Great Hack".

Talk about spouting stuff about lies ...

Quelle surprise - Netflix made a movie - The Great Hack - based on a left-wing manufactured 'scandal' in the same vein as the phony 2016 Election 'Trump/Russia Collusion' scandal that was a 'nothing burger' (haha I like that word)

The Left tried to frame Ted Cruz, Trump and Brexit Elections as Stolen through the use of data, which paled in comparison to OBAMA, who was the originator and Master of DATA Collection on a far, far grander scale. "Obama's Ground Game."

*********

From IBD:

Funny, When Obama Harvested Facebook Data On Millions Of Users To Win In 2012, Everyone Cheered

[www.investors.com]

Privacy: Facebook faces what some are calling an "existential crisis" over revelations that its user data fell into the hands of the Trump campaign. Whether or not the attacks on the social media giant are justified, the fact is that the Obama campaign used Facebook data in the same way in 2012. But the reaction from the pundits and press back then was, shall we say, somewhat different.

According to various news accounts, a professor at Cambridge University built a Facebook app around 2014 that involved a personality quiz. About 270,000 users of the app agreed to share some of their Facebook information, as well as data from people on their friends list. As a result, tens of millions ended up part of this data-mining operation.

Consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, which paid for the research, later worked with the Trump campaign to help them target advertising campaigns on Facebook, using the data they'd gathered on users.

But while the Trump campaign used Cambridge Analytica during the primaries, it didn't use the information during the general election campaign, relying instead on voter data provided by the Republican National Committee, according to CBS News. It reports that "the Trump campaign had tested the RNC data, and it proved to be vastly more accurate than Cambridge Analytica's."

Since this involves the Trump campaign, the news accounts have been suffused with dark conspiratorial tones. The Times article talks about how Trump consultants "exploited" Facebook data, and quotes a source calling it a "scam." It has been widely described as a massive data breach.

But Facebook had been promoting itself to political parties looking for a new way to reach voters.

Nor was this the first time Facebook users had their data unwittingly shared with a political campaign.

According to a July 2012 MIT Technology Review article, when you installed the app, "it said it would grab information about my friends: their birth dates, locations, and 'likes.' "

The campaign boasted that more than a million people downloaded the app, which, given an average friend-list size of 190, means that as many as 190 million had at least some of their Facebook data vacuumed up by the Obama campaign — without their knowledge or consent.

If anything, Facebook made it easy for Obama to do so. A former campaign director, Carol Davidsen, tweeted that "Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn't stop us once they realized that was what we were doing."

This Facebook treasure trove gave Obama an unprecedented ability to reach out to nonsupporters. More important, the campaign could deliver carefully targeted campaign messages disguised as messages from friends to millions of Facebook users.

The campaign readily admitted that this subtle deception was key to their Facebook strategy.

"People don't trust campaigns. They don't even trust media organizations," Teddy Goff, the Obama campaign's digital director, said at the time. "Who do they trust? Their friends."

According to a Time magazine account just after Obama won re-election, "the team blitzed the supporters who had signed up for the app with requests to share specific online content with specific friends simply by clicking a button."

The effort was called a "game-changer" in the 2012 election, and the Obama campaign boasted that it was "the most groundbreaking piece of technology developed for the campaign."

The only difference, as far as we can discern, between the two campaigns' use of Facebook, is that in the case of Obama the users themselves agreed to share their data with the Obama campaign, as well as that of their friends.

The users that downloaded the Cambridge app, meanwhile, were only told that the information would be used for academic purposes. Nor was the data to be used for anything other than academic purposes.

It's an important distinction, to be sure, and Facebook is right to be attacked for its inability to control how its user data were being gathered and shopped around. (Facebook tightened its privacy rules on data sharing apps in 2015.)

But keep in mind that it wasn't the Trump campaign that solicited the collection of the data. And, as we said, it didn't use the data in the general election campaign.

Obama, in contrast, was collecting live data on active users right up until Election Day, and at a scale that dwarfed anything the Trump campaign could access.

More important, the vast majority of people involved in these data-mining operations had no idea they were participating. And in the case of Obama, they had no way of knowing that the Obama campaign material cluttering their feed wasn't really just political urgings from their friends.

There is one other big difference: how these revelations were received by pundits and the press. In 2012, Obama was wildly celebrated in news stories for his mastery of Big Data, and his genius at mining it to get out the vote.

We were told then about how the campaign "won the race for voter data," and how it "connected with young voters." His data analytics gurus were treated as heroes.

This is not to say that Facebook doesn't deserve criticism. Clearly, its data-protection policies have been slipshod.

But the recent fury exposes a massive double standard on the part of those now raising hell.

When Obama was exploiting Facebook users to help win re-election, it was an act of political genius. When Trump attempted something similar, with unclear results, it's a travesty of democracy and further evidence that somehow he stole the election.

So - The Netflix Movie - The Great Hoax - is about how a company used FREELY AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE Facebook Data (like I could go on there and check out people's political beliefs, etc.) to win Elections for Ted Cruz, Trump and Brexit, and what a Scandal it was.

Yet OBAMA and FACEBOOK itself used much more - not readily available to the general public - user data to a greater extent!

But DOUBLE STANDARD - No Scandal for Obama and Facebook!

Read and Learn -

Mark Zuckerberg leveraged Facebook user data to fight rivals and help friends, leaked documents show

[www.nbcnews.com]

Facebook’s leaders seriously discussed selling access to user data — and privacy was an afterthought.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg oversaw plans to consolidate the social network’s power and control competitors by treating its users’ data as a bargaining chip, while publicly proclaiming to be protecting that data, according to about 4,000 pages of leaked company documents largely spanning 2011 to 2015 and obtained by NBC News.

The documents, which include emails, webchats, presentations, spreadsheets and meeting summaries, show how Zuckerberg, along with his board and management team, found ways to tap Facebook’s trove of user data — including information about friends, relationships and photos — as leverage over companies it partnered with.

In some cases, Facebook would reward favored companies by giving them access to the data of its users. In other cases, it would deny user-data access to rival companies or apps.

For example, Facebook gave Amazon extended access to user data because it was spending money on Facebook advertising and partnering with the social network on the launch of its Fire smartphone. In another case, Facebook discussed cutting off access to user data for a messaging app that had grown too popular and was viewed as a competitor, according to the documents.

All the while, Facebook was formulating a strategy to publicly frame these moves as a way of protecting user privacy.

Private communication between users is “increasingly important,” Zuckerberg said in a 2014 New York Times interview. “Anything we can do that makes people feel more comfortable is really good.”

But the documents show that behind the scenes, in contrast with Facebook’s public statements, the company came up with several ways to require third-party applications to compensate Facebook for access to its users’ data, including direct payment, advertising spending and data-sharing arrangements. While it’s not unusual for businesses that are working together to share information about their customers, Facebook has access to sensitive data that many other companies don’t possess.[/size]

*************

(There's lots more to the Expose, but too much to copy and paste.)

Suffice it to say - As usual - The Left accuses Conservatives of doing what they themselves are guilty of!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/17/2021 05:08PM by Jennifer.

I hope you've watched both those documentaries. I hope you are not so blinded by partisanship that you missed the message about how you are being manipulated.

This might be the biggest understatement I see today:
"This is not to say that Facebook doesn't deserve criticism."

Remember, Facebook decides when Presidents are and are not allowed to speak. Facebooks decides what 2.8 billion people will see and read, and what they will not see and read. Facebook manipulates your friends into manipulating you. Facebook decides how you will feel today. Facebook induces mental illness in order to make it easier to manipulate you over the long term. If you use Facebook, you are a programmable tool that a billionaire will sell to the highest bidder he agrees with.

The Obama problem is very concerning, and I worry we are seeing it again. The scary part is seeing people wanting to be manipulated. For very partisan people, when you are manipulated to the right, you feel good and don't see it as manipulation (but as validation), when you are manipulated to the left you feel angry and resentful.

Quote
sodoffsocks
Gary, don't worry, you are forgiven for not understanding how the majority of search engines work (especially anything form big tech, facebook, google, MS, AWS, etc).

Their goal isn't to give you the information your are searching for, their goal is to get you to click on things, ideally things they own, or things that have lots of ads they are selling/profiting from.

So when you say, search for "X Y Z" to somebody, the results they get back will vary depending on a number of factors, include geopolitical location and search/browser history - two different people might get completely the opposite information! So if you've been reading a lot of anti-vaxxer pages, you'll get more of this in your search results (because it knows you click on them), and if you don't do that the results won't be so bias towards anti-vaxxing. So on your search you get "Kaufman is great", but I get "Kaufman is not great".

If you're going to spout stuff about "lies" you need to beware of these things.
A couple of great places to start are "The Social Dilemma" and "The Great Hack".

That's a different take on 'how search engines work'. For example, when I use Google to find information of a political nature, mostly all I get is loads of LEFT-WING BIASED articles and information ...

I always through Google Search Engines are skewed to show Left-Wing results ...

Like when I was looking on Google for information about "The Great Hoax" movie, all I could find was the Left-Wing Faux Scandal stories about how Cruz, Trump and Brexit stole elections by using Facebook Data (that's freely available to all, btw).

Funny how we have two different experiences.

You think Searches are geared to your consumer preferences, and 'click bate' and I think Google Search is geared to further THE LEFT NARRATIVE and AGENDA ...

Quote
sodoffsocks

If you're going to spout stuff about "lies" you need to beware of these things.
A couple of great places to start are "The Social Dilemma" and "The Great Hack"

This film critic doesn't see any 'evidence' for the premise of the movie - The Great Hack - that Trump and Brexit won their Elections because of an analytics company using data - that was readily available to all - to target voters, etc. Not a 'scandal', but a 'nothing burger'! As per usual

The Great Hack: a tired conspiracy theory

Netflix’s Cambridge Analytica exposé doesn’t expose much of substance.

[www.spiked-online.com]

Like I said sort of socks I did actually provide a link after three times of you not being able to find it

instead of spreading your toxic venom here all you have to do is say I put this in and this is what came up and I couldn't find it .

I know how search engines work what you're talkin about is regarding the ads

tell me what comes up when you put in kaufman sovi (even tho i provided the link that youre too lazy to read)

can you do that simple task either?

Quote
sodoffsocks

I hope you've watched both those documentaries. I hope you are not so blinded by partisanship that you missed the message about how you are being manipulated.

Remember, Facebook decides when Presidents are and are not allowed to speak. Facebooks decides what 2.8 billion people will see and read, and what they will not see and read. Facebook manipulates your friends into manipulating you. Facebook decides how you will feel today. Facebook induces mental illness in order to make it easier to manipulate you over the long term. If you use Facebook, you are a programmable tool that a billionaire will sell to the highest bidder he agrees with.

The Obama problem is very concerning, and I worry we are seeing it again. The scary part is seeing people wanting to be manipulated. For very partisan people, when you are manipulated to the right, you feel good and don't see it as manipulation (but as validation), when you are manipulated to the left you feel angry and resentful.

No, I didn't watch The Great Hack because I don't want to waste two hours of my time watching a False Left-Wing Narrative that epitomizes how The Left tries to destroy The Conservatives with LIES - propaganda.

I'll check out the other one sometime, probably for kicks, to see if it's the same kind of misrepresentation, to use a kind word.

And yes, I get it, we get it - we're being manipulated. I don't use Facebook.

If you're so aware of 'manipulation', I'm surprised that you don't think We are being manipulated since the beginning of this Plandemic. And horrors - like 80% of the people OF THE WORLD are falling for it

And during this Plandemic I'm not so much concerned with 'manipulation', as I am with CENSORSHIP and COERCION!

What's your view on Censorship, relating to the Plandemic, of 'My Side' by Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.?