This nurse says she saw the covid vaccine causing injuries

Again nothing but personal attacks.

 

What damn video!

Evasion.

Evasion.

Evasion.

Evasion. You haven't provided ANY data. It's a 10 year old irrelevant report!

Evasion.

Here is the situation:
This user posted a single link with no commentary: HERE
I asked questions of the REPORT: HERE
Astonishingly he denied it was a REPORT - HERE
From the top of the REPORT it says this: Of course it is a damn REPORT!

Just below it tells us that it is 10 years old (relative to pandemic) and NOTHING to do with SARS2!

The useless link: https://openvaers.com/images/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-20116.pdf
The following was asked:
Can you see at the top where it says "report"? You denied it was a report.
Can you see the dates - ten years ago?
Can you explain what the report is supposed to be about?
Do you actually think it is about Covid-19?

Every time these simple questions are asked, there is evasion. I am staggered as to why. A simple "my bad, it was the wrong link" etc. would work!

 

It’s simple. Some people will never admit when they are wrong even when you slap them upside the head with facts. Facts appear to inconvenient, therefore ignored. ​

 

Such as this?
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ausing-injuries.621607/page-9#post-1075018974

 

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

Good heavens no! That's just spammed batshit. Antivax websites are the very worst for deception and mis/disinformation. You've had this explained to you but choose to ignore examples and rebuttal.

And that is again stating the spamming obvious.

 

As I've said before, what those sites say is consistent with what I see happening around me and what your sources say is not consistent with what I see happening around me. The viewers will know what's consistent with what's happening around them.

 

At least a dozen times - that's called spamming.

That's called hearsay and utter garbage. People dropping dead around you? Hospitals empty? Blah blah blah! Spam.

That's actually circular reasoning relying on false hearsay.

That's called stating the total obvious for the 50th time about "viewers". Spam.

Your feeble excuses for failing to answer this are untenable:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...using-injuries.621607/page-10#post-1075019369

May the "viewers" have an answer so that they can decide whether you are being honest?

 

Must be true then.