>>13329216 (pb)
twenty minutes later and you still have no examples.
so that's telling me you are a purveyor of
fear porn.
sorry, you failed the test.
if everyone had to have a 'health care' passport that allowed arbitrary discrimination based upon whatever 'evidence' is shown on the card, who would agree to such a 'passport' or 'vaccination card'?
it would allow anyone arbitrarily to discriminate against you. Terms and conditions of the discrimination would also be arbitrary. It would violate your privacy. It would be used in a capricious manner.
so after people agree with the 'health vax passport' and it shows their medical history, how much longer before it becomes a 'contact list'?
how much longer before someone declares 'oh, you have a check box of the toxic vax and that means, despite what you are told, you are now on the exclusion list, with no appeal'?
and suddenly this magic passport that made the person feel 'safe' becomes the tool of their exclusion from the insiders special dealeo for friends of the regime.
at the whim of arbitrary authority suddenly what you thought showed a virtue, a 'vax certification' becomes the reason for your exhile and for others to arbitrarily descriminate without consequence.
obviously there are so many issues about these 'passport' objects that . . . well they just ought not be.
plus how do we know that the paper that they are made out of won't also be a point of infection?
you are the 'kys fword'
that's why I throw it back at you.
your miscreent ways offend, intentionally.
I know all about you.
'our predictions?'
are you admitting to making up stuff and posting it and trying to hang it on the heads of all the other anon?
what a jerk
there is no 'our predictions'.