2023-10-04 16:11:47
EDITED – The Coué method or assault and battery, in this case.
Indeed, I must return today to the damage caused for three years, almost four, by constant media pressure relaying the official version of the management of the health crisis, the effectiveness of the vaccine and the side effects. The information took a big hit as the authorities had to review their copy on more than one occasion, thus affecting the free will of the French.
“How do you know that a lawyer is lying? It’s simple: his lips move.” The formula is from Coluche. Note that it works just as well with “lawyers” as with “the last four ministers of Health.”
The person who currently occupies this position, Aurélien Rousseau, has just provided proof of this: “We have three years of experience with the anti-Covid vaccine and there are no side effects. ”
Remember that Aurélien Rousseau is former director of ARS Ile-de-France, the region having obtained the worst figures concerning the management of Covid, since he was chief of staff of the Prime Minister and he is not not a doctor.
This is what he declared, like a good soldier, on Tuesday October 3, in front of the mainstream press as part of the after-sales service of the government’s health policy. A source close to the minister confirms that “this is part of his road plan and the quid pro quo for him to be appointed minister “. Aurélien Rousseau was therefore sent to the front to fight the opponents of arbitrariness, those resistant to the vaccine, these people that the President really wants to “annoy”. On the grounds that they would come every day to sow trouble among our fellow citizens, it would even be necessary to speak of sectarian drift! Accusatory inversion characterized when we know who has the power, who avoids debate and who controls the single thought: the blind defenders of compulsory vaccination, a necessity which has in no way been demonstrated and which it is forbidden to contest, except to be immediately the subject of a fatwa or an ordeal. “We must believe in science”, they repeat.
Some no longer even hesitate to use force. Yes, forced vaccination! Already effective in Canada, will France be the next country to comply? And this without having to go through yet another recourse to article 49-3 of the Constitution, the parliamentarians having been almost unanimous in their unquestioning support for the executive power throughout season 1 of the series “Health Emergency” (emergency which is now the norm)? Unfortunately, we can fear that the same will happen in season 2. Season 2, the launch of which Aurélien Rousseau has just announced.
Why such authoritarianism, both in words and in actions? Why refuse to provide all-cause mortality data by vaccination status which would be so useful in closing the debate?
Why not read studies such as the one published by biochemistry doctor Jean-François Lesgards and other researchers on the toxicity of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein originating from the virus and produced from Covid-19 mRNA or adenoviral DNA vaccines or even read the numerous publications of Jean-Marc Sabatier, research director at CNRS and doctor in cell biology. Professor Martin Zizi made a comprehensive tweet that all members of government should read:
Game over:
Vax RNA (according to the GE Health Minister) 1/10,000
SARS2 mortality
– and <60 ans sans comorbidités => 1/300.000
– if >69 years and/or comorbidities => between 3 and 6/1000.
Delta mortality (Jan-Oct 2021) 4 TIMES less than SARS2
OMICRON Mortality (Nov 2021- Now) 200 X…— Martin Zizi (@MartinZ_uncut) October 4, 2023
Would the use of force, to be able to impose one’s decision, be the demonstration that we are short of arguments to support assertions which have all shown themselves to be more questionable than each other in the absence of irrefutable proof?
However, no offense to all these gentlemen and ladies: there will inevitably come a time when the polluters of information will be singled out.
History has shown that despite the Nazi supremacy and global aura achieved by Hitler, Goebbels and company, very few people thought it possible that their cronies would one day be brought to justice. Yet…
By a resounding judgment on the other side of the Atlantic, which AFP has not reported in France, the Supreme Court of the United States has just established that anti-Covid vaccines are not vaccines, on the one hand, and on the other hand that the damage caused by Covid “gene therapies” using messenger RNA would be irreparable, and therefore unfortunately indeed effective, and irrefutably proven. One small step for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the man who initiated this action, one giant leap for humanity.
The same goes for people suspended for refusing the injection: the Supreme Court ordered their compensation because their fundamental rights were violated as a result.
Let’s give justice time to do its job, and return to a purely technical analysis of information and its use. The one that I think should take precedence.
Let me explain.
Information can be defined as a binary string (with 1s and 0s). The parallel with the human genome is that each piece of information is unique and therefore has a DNA equivalent made up of bits.
This information is conveyed to our brain through our senses. The brain will receive this information and analyze it to extract the essence or message. This will in turn generate reactions.
The repetition of these binary strings will cause saturation in the brain, and this saturation will confirm or refute certain information.
“Good” information (that which we consider positive) will generate sensations such as satisfaction or well-being (for example, and since it is happening here at the moment: a victory for France in the Cup of the world of rugby). And vice versa for bad information.
Therefore, information delivered by a holder of authority should have more weight, more than if it were conveyed by word of mouth.
But since error is human, the person providing the information can be wrong.
However, when erroneous information is issued by an authority, particularly the press, it can have serious consequences. Let us recall in this regard that the AFP broadcast the false information of the death of Martin Bouygues. Or the one according to which we had found Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès. And there are plenty of other examples!
When a binary string constitutes erroneous, repeated information ad nauseamby a person with authority, and while the person issuing it is in a position to know that this information is false, this has consequences as toxic as when a polluter continues to pollute a river upstream of a city while knowing that this will affect the health of citizens.
If we model information as a string of bits which has positive or negative properties, it acts on humans like a molecule whose toxicity will vary depending on its content and its veracity. False information is of course more toxic than true information, even if the latter is unbearable for the person. A doctor knows something about it when he has to deliver bad news to his patient about his state of health.
I remind you that water, one of the vital molecules for humans, is toxic to humans in three of its states (solid or ice, gas and plasma). The water burns and is deadly. Even in its liquid state, that is to say its most vital state for us, water can also have a harmful effect: too much water kills by drowning. It is therefore conceivable and possible to classify a binary string of bits composing information and to assign a degree of toxicity to it according to its veracity.
Once this stage has passed, the polluter pays law can apply. Thus, as soon as a person delivers a polluting message, toxic information or disinformation, without characterizing their words as being an opinion or an opinion, they will be responsible for the effects on individuals.
And what’s more when the person in question is the holder of authority. After all, we invented mRNA in genetics!
For these reasons :
Mr. Minister of Health, if delivering a message like you did, according to which side effects do not exist, comes from a desire not to see what is really happening in society, it is a question of at least a certain bias allowing the choices of your predecessors to be confirmed, and above all – more serious! – it is incomplete information from a holder of authority.
It would therefore be good, as the interest of our fellow citizens is at the center of your concerns, to organize a real debate which would allow the French to be duly informed of the reality in the real world, on the state of science and not in the metaverse belief space in which we try to circumscribe minds: “Don’t think and believe what I say. »
A well-informed population is a healthy population because it can act in accordance with its knowledge of reality.
How on earth could this bother you so much that you seem to want to systematically oppose it?
#Aurélien #Rousseaus #Coué #method