Very serious implications in comments.
i've been watching this and I'm almost convinced that Vanden Bossche is either a planted agent to come across as though he's looking out for humanity OR he has former colleagues at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation feeding him BS that he truly believes...
Now, you can argue that "well how is his predictions so spot on"? My only explanation I have is it's because Gates is Sinister. Gates, being part of the Globalist, Eugenicist agenda knows the pre-planned narrative directive and can therefore pre-advise theoretical scenarios which will align with the future narratives.
What makes me particular skeptical of Bossche himself is he says stuff like "I don't know about your country, but here people are getting Covid at all times of year". Bullshit he doesn't know how it's getting reported as a strange occurrence in Summer, etc. Especially if he is so focused and so well versed on the situation. How can he not be monitoring it AND know what is happening and going to happen at the same time? Unless he's only said those words in an attempt to trigger the listener to think "hey, yes that's true" hoping that doing so will encourage the listener to agree with more of what he says. Or unless he's trying to not come across as invasively cocky, claiming he knows more about their country than they do. I guess either of these scenarios are plausible but I personally cringe when I hear dishonesty, no matter the intention.
More comments to follow...
I haven't watched this interview yet.
Before the covid vaccines came out, the main selling point of vaccines generally was that they created "herd immunity".
The weird thing about covid vaccines is that they dropped the "herd immunity" claims quite early on in the vaccination campaign.
We aren't hearing about "herd immunity" anymore, and trolls all over social media arrogantly deny that this was ever the goal of vaccination and mock anti-vaxxers who bring this up for being dumb and ignorant.
Anyway I guess I should watch the video before commenting more. 🤔
If you read this within the first 40mins of me posting, please re-read the post as I have updated it. Now onto my further comments.
My biggest issue with his entire argument: Geert discusses this "pandemic" vs previous pandemics. He talks about how in the past we have eradicated diseases through naturally acquired herd immunity (this is kind of tough for me to talk about at all since I disagree with Germ theory all together and the narrative we've been fed about past 'viruses') and then goes on to say that right now with this pandemic we are seeing countless infections in people who are not dying and not being hospitalised. His claim, correct me if I'm wrong, is that a successfully defeated virus will mean we don't have so many cases still circulating. The concern he raises is in regards to those with natural immunity getting Covid a second time around, as well as of course the vaccinated being highly susceptible to the illness as well. But what is he basing this on? Testing For Fuck Sake!?! We know the tests are utter garbage! I don't quite understand how they work, which is frustrating because they certainly do seem to have correlations in people getting positive results in clusters. Are they based on hormonal changes? Are they based on fight or flight responses, where someone scared of "catching Covid" from a close contact is likely to have physiological changes resulting in something causing a "test" to show positive? And then this fear additionally works in the nocebo manner, creating illness in the individual? Do people with regular cold/flu show up as positive due to presence of particularly higher levels of bacteria? I don't know unfortunately but I'm confident the tests are shit. REGARDLESS of all of this though, Geerts analysis is comparing previous pandemics to this one. Previous ones where this BS "testing" was never present, at least not on mass scale, if not at all. So he has no data to suggest that (if germ theory is actually correct) that with previous pandemics we still had people "catching" other diseases and not dying or being hospitalised. This alone throws his entire hypothesis out the window.
What is far worse now is what this hypothesis is suggesting, without saying it directly.
The future survival of the planet apparently lies in the bodies of the unvaccinated, which includes a larger portion of children.
As a Globalist Scumbag "for the greater good" leader, you would listen to this and make the decision to round up all the unvaccinated and segregate them from the rest of society since the species survival lies with them. And in doing so, these rounded up people would necessarily need to be experimented on to determine how their bodies function so we can "find a cure". I don't need to explain to anybody what this reminds me of. Alternatively (or additionally) since the children will make the largest portion of unvaccinated, a mass scale stolen generation may be "needed to save humanity".
I don't even want to elaborate anymore on this. Use your own imagination.
Let me also be clear:
I'm not implying that what Geert is saying will not come into fruition.
My biggest concern is that the narrative side of it will, through the continued manipulation of data, through the shifting of deaths from Covid jabs being labelled "another variant" or "long Covid". The truth and science is irrelevant. It's only what people perceive to be reality that matters and what he's claiming, accurate or not, will be used as the basis of reality. And so what's happening in China now is a very plausible near future, in my opinion due to covered up long term vaccine induced deaths, easily covered up by the mass censorship already trialled.