It's difficult to grasp, isn't it? In a Dolores Cahill interview, she tried to raise the issue of who is culpable and who should be forgiven - for murder. Every doctor and every nurse who administered a jab is culpable. Every doctor who failed to prescribe life saving drugs to the dying is culpable. Every business that required jabs of their staff is culpable. But where do we draw the line? These people may be culpable in their own right, but not as culpable as those who gave them the orders. The ones giving the orders are first tier, and those applying the orders are second tier.
I think Dolores was trying to raise the issue of forgiveness for the second tier. We have to forgive the brainwashed, who honestly thought they were doing the right thing, particularly if they have now woken up to their crime. The only thing we should ask from them is an admission that they were wrong and an apology. If we could do that, and mean it, how many of the previously brainwashed would come across to our side of the fence?
In this system, though, where do we draw the line? Where do we draw the line between the brainwashed and the brain-washers? I think we can allow the culpable to determine that for themselves. One of them admitting fault and apologizing is worth gold. So if even Brett Sutton was to wholeheartedly admit fault and apologise, would we or should we forgive him? I think yes, because the bigger the crime they have committed, the more significant their defection to our side of the fence and the more people they will bring with them.
It is a difficult question but one I believe we have to ask.
I am considering how we move on from this. Medical training is, in essence, brainwashing. We are dealing with a demographic that is, by definition, incapable of independent thought. We cannot blame them for being what they are, "repeaters"
It really IS the wonder drug from Japan..
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/#:~:text=Discovered%20in%20the%20late%2D1970s,of%20billions%20of%20people%20throughout
It's difficult to grasp, isn't it? In a Dolores Cahill interview, she tried to raise the issue of who is culpable and who should be forgiven - for murder. Every doctor and every nurse who administered a jab is culpable. Every doctor who failed to prescribe life saving drugs to the dying is culpable. Every business that required jabs of their staff is culpable. But where do we draw the line? These people may be culpable in their own right, but not as culpable as those who gave them the orders. The ones giving the orders are first tier, and those applying the orders are second tier.
I think Dolores was trying to raise the issue of forgiveness for the second tier. We have to forgive the brainwashed, who honestly thought they were doing the right thing, particularly if they have now woken up to their crime. The only thing we should ask from them is an admission that they were wrong and an apology. If we could do that, and mean it, how many of the previously brainwashed would come across to our side of the fence?
In this system, though, where do we draw the line? Where do we draw the line between the brainwashed and the brain-washers? I think we can allow the culpable to determine that for themselves. One of them admitting fault and apologizing is worth gold. So if even Brett Sutton was to wholeheartedly admit fault and apologise, would we or should we forgive him? I think yes, because the bigger the crime they have committed, the more significant their defection to our side of the fence and the more people they will bring with them.
It is a difficult question but one I believe we have to ask.
I am considering how we move on from this. Medical training is, in essence, brainwashing. We are dealing with a demographic that is, by definition, incapable of independent thought. We cannot blame them for being what they are, "repeaters"
So, if all these people are guilty, how do we, as a society, move on? What kind of retribution do you want?