Santa Claus' Punch and Judy (1948)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=UZ1zeCMYuxM&si=2uc0mK3E2VXcde1P

Punch And Judy (1950)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=DheNfmrj89k&si=_u3X_42Po6Mdza36

📺
END OF THE PIERS TIERS SHOW 😎🤓

https://truthtube.video/watch/australian-national-review-founder-talks-about-the-nz-data-leak-and-slams-the-mainstream-media-silen_oY6cOSbKmYDRuFO.html These things take time. The hard data speaks for itself. The truth always comes out in the end.

Peat Cutting: An Ancient Islay Tradition 🌱🔪
⠀
Discover Islay’s time-honored peat-cutting tradition. For centuries, locals have skillfully harvested dense, decomposed vegetation known as peat. It serves as a vital fuel source, warming homes and imparting unique flavors to peat-fired whisky. This ancient technique preserves cultural heritage while honoring the island’s resilient people and delicate ecosystems.

Science and facts💡

#Anonymous Message to the Citizens of the United States of America
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Zkeyw-j_L_g&si=2q81Pl_u1fFioysS

My Position on "No Virus"

(Opinion only - please make your own assessment. "No virus" refers to the claim that viruses do not cause disease)

I think "no virus" may well be correct, but given how convincing psyops can be, I'd have to try to prove to myself the premises are accurate/unbiased. I'd want to:

- Keep a close eye for groupthink and closely examine the facts, checking each step in the reasoning process appears watertight.
- Approach it from the other angle, seeing if I can find a valid reasoning process that explains why viruses exist and cause disease.
- Read a wide selection of papers, not just those referenced by "no virus" articles.
- Talk to people on each side of the debate.

I don't see those being quick or easy. If it were done in "spare time", research quality may be insufficient to uncover flaws in the premises, if they exist.

If I chose to limit the research to 2 or 3 weeks, I'd have to pause other activities I see as critically important, with no guarantee I'd end up feeling "certain" at the end - "fairly convinced" isn't "certain".

In general, I think it's wise for people to present their views as "opinions" (or "strong opinions") rather than as "definitive facts". I think that's healthy, and allows people room to breathe and grow in their own independent thinking, rather than feeling pressured to agree.

Assuming "no virus" is correct, which it may be, there may still be a psyop occurring. Given what I've observed in the truth movement, it's very likely some people will be:
- Discrediting "no virus", by doing things that undermine themselves or the message
- Using "no virus" to promote division

I'd consider the following to be potential red flags:

> Stating, as a "definitive fact" and not as an opinion, that "no virus" is the "key that will unlock everything".
> Calling out people who are "on the fence" when it comes to "no virus".
> Calling out people who don't agree that "no virus" is the most important topic in the movement.
> Denying that "no virus" has any potential to be used to cause unhelpful division.

Even if correct, "no virus" has the potential to be misused in a similar way to the "Q" psyop.
People may be encouraged to believe it holds "the key to everything", which may lessen their involvement in other projects and initiatives.
I would have strong reservations on "no virus" being promoted as the "key to everything".
If people spend most of their online time in "no virus" groups, they may contribute less overall to the movement, perhaps by design.

"No virus" would likely be a poor topic choice when talking to mainstreamers, especially if promoted (perhaps deliberately) by people with various red flags or whose presenting manner lacks balance.

If people are too "religious" about "no virus", that may discredit the movement and cause division.

I don't think "no virus" is a valid reason to divide the movement in "you're either with us or against us" fashion. I'm not claiming everyone supporting "no virus" does that, but some may to varying degrees, unknowingly or knowingly.

If groups are overtly or covertly encouraging people to distance themselves from people who don't support "no virus", then that raises questions.

Overall, I prefer a "live and let live" mindset when it comes to "no virus". It should be okay for people to have their own opinion, and to coexist and cooperate.

Look how they have hidden away the toxic Ba'aI Gates food. Be very careful when shopping for produce at the supermarket. When you see this label immediately dispose of it or better yet, return it to the store.

It's covered in poison that you can't get it off or out of it.

Credit: AIba Hatcher

T.me/TheTrutherist
T.me/TheTrutheristChat

THE FORBIDDEN FILM 1 (PART 1 OF 2) - Agenda 21, DEPOPULATION, EUGENICS and MUCH MORE
https://rumble.com/v2nkhfi-the-forbidden-film-part-1-of-2-agenda-21-depopulation-eugenics-and-much-mor.html