Jump to content

KEEP THOSE VACCINE DEATHS QUIET!


Recommended Posts

https://torontosun.com/news/national/burial-costs-covered-for-canadians-killed-by-approved-vaccines

  • Burial costs covered for Canadians killed by approved vaccines

This was originally published in Aug 2021.

The article is careful not to mention which vaccines (or jabs) are killing people, but 'our' gov't doesn't want to haggle over vax-induced deaths. Apparently they just want to chuck dead people into the ground as fast as possible to keep them from the public conscience.

They dedicated $75M to the "Chuck 'em in a hole" Fund:

  • “The program will provide death benefits and support for funeral expenses in the rare case of a death as a result of having received a Health Canada authorized vaccine,” said the note Vaccine Injury Support Program.

    The department has budgeted $75 million for all claims but said it was unclear how many submissions there could be. Management of the program is contracted to RCGT Consulting.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Seems to me they're doing the opposite 

1) This just takes the legal impetus out of a vax-death scenario. The gov't can swoop in and quickly cover the cost of a funeral, leaving less room for people to file a lawsuit against the gov't.

Imagine a case where someone has to take the jab to keep their job, and they have to keep their job or they'll lose their mortgage. They don't want to take the jab, but they have no other choice, and they "die suddenly" [it kills them]. 

In that scenario the bereaved family members could try to sue the gov't, and they have very finite costs of a funeral on the books to sue for which makes their lawsuit necessary for the courts to deal with, but those costs are just quickly scratched off the ledger by the gov't. Now it's only a hardship case which is a huge grey area, along with the grey area stemming from the fact that medical authorities don't put "vaccination" down as a cause of death. 

ScreenShot2024-04-04at9_41_38AM.thumb.png.1913c866dac745a52aabe833606f95f4.png

People who "die of covid" are checked off on the spot: "Coughed ten days ago? Check. We're done here." People who die after vaxing are left as question marks. "Died suddenly" is a new official cause of death:

  • SDS is not a formal diagnosis: no set criteria universally define sudden death. However, a 2023 article suggests that many experts have adopted the World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition. It states that SDS is sudden, unexpected death from natural causes witnessed within one hour of symptom onset.

2) This has "political expediency" written all over it. It's like the Duffygate $90K on steroids.

"Do you want the cheque to cover your funeral costs or not, lady? Sign here, and don't get any of your stupid tears on the paper. This is 98 brilliance, 28 lb paper. It's over $25 a ream."

The jab-apologists are out in force today. What's up? 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1) This just takes the legal impetus out of a vax-death scenario. The gov't can swoop in and quickly cover the cost of a funeral, leaving less room for people to file a lawsuit against the gov't.

Imagine a case where someone has to take the jab to keep their job, and they have to keep their job or they'll lose their mortgage. They don't want to take the jab, but they have no other choice, and they "die suddenly" [it kills them]. 

In that scenario the bereaved family members could try to sue the gov't, and they have very finite costs of a funeral on the books to sue for which makes their lawsuit necessary for the courts to deal with, but those costs are just quickly scratched off the ledger by the gov't. Now it's only a hardship case which is a huge grey area, along with the grey area stemming from the fact that medical authorities don't put "vaccination" down as a cause of death. 

ScreenShot2024-04-04at9_41_38AM.thumb.png.1913c866dac745a52aabe833606f95f4.png

People who "die of covid" are checked off on the spot: "Coughed ten days ago? Check. We're done here." People who die after vaxing are left as question marks. "Died suddenly" is a new official cause of death:

  • SDS is not a formal diagnosis: no set criteria universally define sudden death. However, a 2023 article suggests that many experts have adopted the World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition. It states that SDS is sudden, unexpected death from natural causes witnessed within one hour of symptom onset.

2) This has "political expediency" written all over it. It's like the Duffygate $90K on steroids.

"Do you want the cheque to cover your funeral costs or not, lady? Sign here, and don't get any of your stupid tears on the paper. This is 98 brilliance, 28 lb paper. It's over $25 a ream."

The jab-apologists are out in force today. What's up? 

But if the government wanted to keep it quiet, why would they allow this appearance of liability? Since they own the judges and presumably have enough experts to fund a big lie, they could get the lawsuits thrown out of court by bringing in one of their paid experts right?

The moral of the story is that conspiracy theories still need to have internal logic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

But if the government wanted to keep it quiet, why would they allow this appearance of liability?

Because they can get away with it - CTV and CBC have Trudeau's back in all things vax-fascism related - and it's the best way to keep the story quiet.

*Nothing can go to court.*

Quote

Since they own the judges

No one owns ALL the judges, but sometimes owning one or two is enough. This isn't the latter.

Quote

and presumably have enough experts to fund a big lie,

Big Pharma is doing that. 

Quote

they could get the lawsuits thrown out of court by bringing in one of their paid experts right?

No. Not in every instance, and a court-documented case of a vax-induced death is the last thing they want. 

Hard expenses are easy to get to court. It's math. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

But if the government wanted to keep it quiet, why would they allow this appearance of liability? Since they own the judges and presumably have enough experts to fund a big lie, they could get the lawsuits thrown out of court by bringing in one of their paid experts right?

The moral of the story is that conspiracy theories still need to have internal logic.

In 2 and 3 year old stories.

This is not new news, it has been out there for years. And it was probably exposed even before that.

Some guys just gotta dig up old news to perpetuate their conspiracy theories LOL

My opinion...as valid as theirs. :)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

The moral of the story is that conspiracy theories still need to have internal logic.

The moral of the story is that Canadians are short on morals.

You are fully aware that young people who didn't need the jab were harmed by it, and you don't even want to know how badly or how many. You'd rather not know. You're just gonna keep on pretending that they don't matter while you indulge in your ignorance and lies.

Our MSM won't put faces to those stories; they have to remain faceless and their stories have to remain hidden from the public because we can't be allowed to care about them. 

If you go to the sites/sources who have the info about the vax-injured it's a closely guarded secret. You have to sift through the boilerplate BS of "There was a pandemic and the vaccines were required to save lives and experts agree [yup, just a vague allusion to experts in general] that they saved a lot of people but a small percentage of people may have been hurt by it, investigations are still ongoing...."

Then they start off babbling about the things that no one cares about like: "Approximately 0.0017% of vaccinations resulted in slight soreness around the injection site. This may ......."

Ten paragraphs in you still haven't learned anything worth knowing and you wish that you had died of covid. 

What you get for "information" isn't raw, useful data, it's their own charts and graphs which are carefully manipulated to look good.

And yeah, they will outright lie to you like statista does:

This was taken from their site today, and I've emailed them twice to tell them that their info is incorrect, but they keep it on there. Let's be honest, when you know you've got some things written down that aren't true, and you've been notified of it, it's a lie...

ScreenShot2024-04-04at1_56_31PM.thumb.png.34c24343cf78165e7c2c178791bd8fc5.png

Statista is lying, plain and simple. Or at least John Elflein was lying, and he "published" that graph, so I assume that he works for them. If he doesn't work for them then Statista is publishing his lies, and Statista was notified of the inaccuracy twice...

This is their quote, which is visible in the picture above:

  • As of September 25, 2022, there have been around 10,800 confirmed deaths due to COVID-19 among unvaccinated Canadians since the start of the national vaccination campaign in December 2020. In contrast, just 3,821 (16.8%) COVID-19 deaths were reported among those who were fully vaccinated during the same time period. This statistic illustrates the number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths in Canada from December 14, 2020 to September 25, 2022, by vaccination status.

There were not 3,821 deaths among the fully "vaccinated", there were 3,821 fully "vaccinated" deaths plus 5,209 fully "vaccinated" who had an additional booster plus 1,031 fully "vaccinated" who had two additional boosters. All of the people in the last 3 columns were "fully vaxed", just some of them were additionally boosted. That's 10,061 people, or 48%. 

Their comment "just 16.8% were fully vaccinated" is a total lie. It's a pure work of fiction.

Additionally, that data set contains one full flu-season where almost 100% of Canadians were unvaxed. It's a completely flawed data set by it's selection/revelation process (Health Canada's fault) and they should at least acknowledge the wild inaccuracy/inconsistency of what's being shown. It's basic junk. 

It's also another example of a lie being printed on a page right alongside the proof that it's a lie, just like the MSNBC article where they misquoted RFK Jr even though his original quote was just above it on the page, but leftists "don't see it". You guys are extremely credulous little cultists, and very easy to lie to. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You are fully aware that young people who didn't need the jab were harmed by it, and you don't even want to know how badly or how many. 

I have had enough of this topic years ago.

I don't remember what you ever said about it, but I haven't read anything lucid on the topic from that angle that had a balanced take.

Let's cut to the conclusion: are you blaming people for mistakes here or alleging a conspiracy?

 

Tldr please, I didn't read the post.

Edited by Michael Hardner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Did someone burst the conspiracy bag again??  LOL

Aw, here we go again with the conspiracy attacks bullshit by the usual buffoon. Conspiracies do happen every day and they are happening somewhere in the world right now. What is with dumb ass left wing liberal buffoons like you, that if someone produces something they may appear to be a part of some kind of a conspiracy, you automatically go into your typical left wing liberal ballistic mode? Do you believe that conspiracies can and do exist or that conspiracies do not exist? Which is it, lefty? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

The moral of the story is that Canadians are short on morals.

You are fully aware that young people who didn't need the jab were harmed by it, and you don't even want to know how badly or how many. You'd rather not know. You're just gonna keep on pretending that they don't matter while you indulge in your ignorance and lies.

Our MSM won't put faces to those stories; they have to remain faceless and their stories have to remain hidden from the public because we can't be allowed to care about them. 

If you go to the sites/sources who have the info about the vax-injured it's a closely guarded secret. You have to sift through the boilerplate BS of "There was a pandemic and the vaccines were required to save lives and experts agree [yup, just a vague allusion to experts in general] that they saved a lot of people but a small percentage of people may have been hurt by it, investigations are still ongoing...."

Then they start off babbling about the things that no one cares about like: "Approximately 0.0017% of vaccinations resulted in slight soreness around the injection site. This may ......."

Ten paragraphs in you still haven't learned anything worth knowing and you wish that you had died of covid. 

What you get for "information" isn't raw, useful data, it's their own charts and graphs which are carefully manipulated to look good.

And yeah, they will outright lie to you like statista does:

This was taken from their site today, and I've emailed them twice to tell them that their info is incorrect, but they keep it on there. Let's be honest, when you know you've got some things written down that aren't true, and you've been notified of it, it's a lie...

ScreenShot2024-04-04at1_56_31PM.thumb.png.34c24343cf78165e7c2c178791bd8fc5.png

Statista is lying, plain and simple. Or at least John Elflein was lying, and he "published" that graph, so I assume that he works for them. If he doesn't work for them then Statista is publishing his lies, and Statista was notified of the inaccuracy twice...

This is their quote, which is visible in the picture above:

  • As of September 25, 2022, there have been around 10,800 confirmed deaths due to COVID-19 among unvaccinated Canadians since the start of the national vaccination campaign in December 2020. In contrast, just 3,821 (16.8%) COVID-19 deaths were reported among those who were fully vaccinated during the same time period. This statistic illustrates the number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths in Canada from December 14, 2020 to September 25, 2022, by vaccination status.

There were not 3,821 deaths among the fully "vaccinated", there were 3,821 fully "vaccinated" deaths plus 5,209 fully "vaccinated" who had an additional booster plus 1,031 fully "vaccinated" who had two additional boosters. All of the people in the last 3 columns were "fully vaxed", just some of them were additionally boosted. That's 10,061 people, or 48%. 

Their comment "just 16.8% were fully vaccinated" is a total lie. It's a pure work of fiction.

Additionally, that data set contains one full flu-season where almost 100% of Canadians were unvaxed. It's a completely flawed data set by it's selection/revelation process (Health Canada's fault) and they should at least acknowledge the wild inaccuracy/inconsistency of what's being shown. It's basic junk. 

It's also another example of a lie being printed on a page right alongside the proof that it's a lie, just like the MSNBC article where they misquoted RFK Jr even though his original quote was just above it on the page, but leftists "don't see it". You guys are extremely credulous little cultists, and very easy to lie to. 

MH always appears to be short on something. Just my opinion. 🤣

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I have had enough of this topic years ago.

How is "young people grievously injured or killed by the jab" something that never really needed to be discussed?

Covid dominated the news cycle for two full years and you were fine with it.

People were scared into vaxing, and into vaxing their children, then the story went away even though deaths went up by 30%...

I find it weird that covid was all the rage when 15K and 14K people died of it in 2020 and 2021, and then when 19K people died of covid in 2022 suddenly you were done with it... Kids were injured or killed by the jab and you never needed to know more about it...

Your level of ignorance is brutal. You're like the people in Germany who kinda knew about the ovens but didn't really "know" about the ovens, right?

"I heard that there are some ovens there with people in them or something, they're probably not though. The Fuhrer is a pretty decent guy: he'd never do that. And besides, it wasn't on GBC or GTV. If it was really happening, it would have been on the nightly 'news'."

Quote

Let's cut to the conclusion: are you blaming people for mistakes here or alleging a conspiracy?

I'm calling people liars, but the proof is right there so I guess I'm just pointing out the fact that they ARE liars. Statista and MSNBC in that last post. Liars. You can quote me on that. Drop 'em a line. They won't say or do sh1t because they know. 

I'm also calling you for choosing ignorance and lies when the health of young people is at stake.

Quote

Tldr please, I didn't read the post.

Of course not. Why pull your head out of your ass now? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. How is "young people grievously injured or killed by the jab" something that never really needed to be discussed?

Covid dominated the news cycle for two full years and you were fine with it.

People were scared into vaxing, and into vaxing their children, then the story went away even though deaths went up by 30%...

 

Hindsight is 20/20.  Our statistics are much better than in the US, and we had more Public health response so...

If you're saying there was malfeasance, I don't see it. If you're saying there was incompetence, well maybe, but also pretty incredible public response to an unprecedented mass event.

Hindsight is 20/20.

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Why pull your head out of your ass now? 

Because I waste enough of my time reading garbage on here.

Feel free to post thousand word responses which I also read. There are limits as to how much information I need to gather to come to the conclusion that sh1t is brown.

Edited by Michael Hardner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, taxme said:

Conspiracies do happen every day and they are happening somewhere in the world right now. 

Yes, but throwing one strike doesn't make you a good bowler if your first 999 tries were gutter-balls.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The back and forth on this issue is interesting because it speaks to the lingering divisiveness. It's noteworthy though that none of it (in terms of general consensus) really addresses my concerns, which I think were always pretty modest. 

Personally, when I look back on all this I see that:

- My questions were never answered, instead they were ridiculed by people who didn't even understand basic biology... but that's not the point.

- Mandates divided the country and divided families, adverse reactions later observed (even anecdotally) created a level of vaccine hesitancy that never needed to happen. Trust in government, media, doctors and vaccines in general plumeted... but that's not the point.

- The rabid pro-vax community were wildly wrong on virtually all fronts, not the least of which was efficacy, virus transmission, longevity of protection, SP systemic migration, and inflammation effects... but that's not the point

The final pro-vaccine rationalization was almost comical. Remember the "if you get covid you won't die" stance. Well, even that was wrong... but that's not the point.

The point for me was letting people do their own threat assessments and letting them come to their own conclusions. All that was need to support it  was honest information, answering questions, not suppressing information with a paid for media and not weaponizing professional associations.

It makes people lose trust in previously trusted institutions and professions. Why would anyone be surprised at that?

For me it was pretty simple, do what's right for you based on your own situation, your own threat assessment, and honest (heavy emphasis on honest here) recommendations from your doctor based on assessments that are tailored to YOU.

Then have the courtesy to allow others the same consideration.  

Here's how simple it was: In general, and specifically with regard to mandates and firings, all I needed from you was absolutely NOTHING and all you ever had to do to get along with me was mind your own business and leave me alone.  

 

 

 

 

Edited by Venandi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hindsight is 20/20.  Our statistics are much better than in the US, and we had more Public health response so...

If you're saying there was malfeasance, I don't see it. If you're saying there was incompetence, well maybe, but also pretty incredible public response to an unprecedented mass event.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Yeah but it wasn't 'hindsight'. 

1) I'm 55 and before the vaccine was made available to people in my age range we already had the Israeli ICU data which showed that the vaccines weren't working anywhere near as well as we were promised.

2) By the time the vax was available for people younger than me we were already 100% aware of the fact that young, healthy people weren't being affected by covid. 

1 + 2 = 3) The vaxes weren't very good, and young people didn't need them, so why force them? 

What happened to young people here was a crime. A total crime. 

Quote

Because I waste enough of my time reading garbage on here.

Buddy, CBC and the Star is where you go if you want to find garbage. CNN. 

Sure, you could read robo's posts or rebound's posts or eyeball or ExFlyer or Black Dog's posts if you want to, or just put them on ignore like a normal human. 

I'll take the word of CdnFox or Nationalist or D93, etc, etc any day before I even glance at what's on CNN or CBC. 

Quote

Feel free to post thousand word responses which I also read. There are limits as to how much information I need to gather to come to the conclusion that sh1t is brown.

I'm calling people liars, I need to be thorough and explain myself fully. Not even people TBH, corporations with 'reputations' (lol) to protect and legal teams. 

If by some chance people from those corporations get word that things were said about them here, and they want to check it out, they have to know that what's written here is solid enough that there's no way fwd with a lawsuit.

I doubt anyone here can afford a libel suit, but I certainly can't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Venandi said:

The point for me was letting people do their own threat assessments and letting them come to their own conclusions. All that was need to support it  was honest information, answering questions, not suppressing information with a paid for media and not weaponizing professional associations.

Yeah, that's not what this was about.

If you look back through our history there have been several attempts by big pharma to get us hooked on flu vaccines.

The covers of all the big 'news' magazines throughout the decades are like the gravestones of pandemic scares like H1N1, avian flu, bird flu, swine flu, SARS, MERS, etc, etc. (And global warming, global freezing, global cooling, global warming, global freezing... Greta Thunberg's latest one: "Global give us money and stop driving your cars while we fly in private jets and cruise in private mega-yachts" is nothing new)

The previous viral scares were all gonna be super bad but the panic never caught hold. They've tried vaccines for some of them, they've also pimped vaccines for the regular seasonal flus with little to no success.

There has even been at least one attempt to make flu vaccines mandatory for nurses, doctors and hospital employees in the past but they were overturned in court. 

This was "the big one". The money-shot. The big payday. Go big or go home. 

If they could have gotten us all to take the vax, then they could have told us all that we would have all died without it, and then they could tell us that every year for the next hundred years and who'd know any better? We'd be hooked forever. They might even be able to cancel out our natural immunity at some point in the future. Wouldn't that be grand? 

You were never supposed to have rights or make decisions for yourself, peon. You were supposed to stfu and join the queue. This was an exercise in big money and getting peons to give up their basic rights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Yeah, that's not what this was about.

It was for me and you seem to have supported my very point below...

28 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You were never supposed to have rights or make decisions for yourself, peon. You were supposed to stfu and join the queue. This was an exercise in big money and getting peons to give up their basic rights. 

Maybe my post wasn't clear enough, and not to drift the thread further from vaccine death and harm statistics but:

I tend to hold voters (the people) accountable for a lot of this. Some 70% were in favour of mandates and cheered when their neighbours got fired. About 20% (if memory serves) supported the idea of interning unvaccinated individuals. 

If those folks had defended the idea of individual rights, if they had done their own threat assessments, if they had left others alone to do theirs and minded their own business, if they hadn't gleefully cheered those firings, I might be feeling a little better about our trajectory as nation right now. 

Vaccine hesitancy is becoming an issue now and I'm not surprised that it is. I fear there are more harm statistics coming our way as a direct result of it.

 

 

Edited by Venandi
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Their comment "just 16.8% were fully vaccinated" is a total lie. It's a pure work of fiction.

From the looks of it, this kind of "naive" manipulation of data is nothing short of disgusting. Putting ideology, any greatest one, ahead of the objective reality is always a trouble and a dead end too. Always. And we're still struggling to figure it out, here. Ooh.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Venandi said:

I tend to hold voters (the people) accountable for a lot of this. Some 70% were in favour of mandates and cheered when their neighbours got fired. About 20% (if memory serves) supported the idea of interning unvaccinated individuals

General folks easier submit to propaganda and fear, so unavoidably, a massive propaganda of fear. This is of course the same phenomenon that lead to extreme forms of oppression such as fascism. I won't assign labels here. But sure, it's the same ground basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

But if the government wanted to keep it quiet, why would they allow this appearance of liability? Since they own the judges and presumably have enough experts to fund a big lie, they could get the lawsuits thrown out of court by bringing in one of their paid experts right?

The moral of the story is that conspiracy theories still need to have internal logic.

I wonder...were proper autopsies being done on these SDS victims?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, taxme said:

Aw, here we go again with the conspiracy attacks bullshit by the usual buffoon. Conspiracies do happen every day and they are happening somewhere in the world right now. What is with dumb ass left wing liberal buffoons like you, that if someone produces something they may appear to be a part of some kind of a conspiracy, you automatically go into your typical left wing liberal ballistic mode? Do you believe that conspiracies can and do exist or that conspiracies do not exist? Which is it, lefty? 

 

So, you say conspiracies happen every day and then you say because someone claims it may be one they are "dumb ass left wing liberal buffoons"? and "go into your typical left wing liberal ballistic mode"? All claims of conspiracies are made by "dumb ass left wing liberal buffoons"?

Are you a bit confused and seem to be stumbling over your own tongue (or keyboard) LOL

In this specific case, passing off 2 and 3 year old news clips and trying to make it relative is a conspiracy theory.   https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspiracy theory

I guess if you have a point and want to be valid, prove it in todays perspective.  Old news has had time to fester and if there was validity, it would have changed a lot of things but in this specific case, it was noted 2 and 3 years ago and died a natural death. Bringing it up again is only an attempt to make something of it or, a conspiracy theory that there was something being hidden.

Edited by ExFlyer
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...