Mates father in law was same as you, said it’s all a load of shite and refused all the vaccines
Don't take any of what I'm about to say personally. I'm responding to what you said, but it's not actually aimed at you, personally and it's not aimed at your mate's father in law, personally. It's just deconstructing what you said in order to point out that the story doesn't actually prove anything.
Got took into hospital last week and had to phone round his family on Friday to say his goodbyes as doctors said he might not make it,
So, he went to hospital, and the doctors scared the crap out of him by telling him he had a potentially fatal lurgy, so, in that frightened state, he rang his family because the doctors advised him to.
Doesn't prove that he had a potentially fatal virus.
Doesn't prove he was actually at death's door, either, even if they told him he was.
We're ALL at risk of dying, of something or other (thousands of possible ways) EVERY DAY of our lives.
We ALL get ill, from time to time. Having a 'test' done that supposedly 'proves' one is infected with a virus doesn't necessarily prove it as an absolute fact. There are numerous ways in which a test can be inaccurate (or dishonestly devised or manufactured or promoted) or in which a test can be inaccurately or dishonestly interpreted, or one or more of many other variables.
You know the first thing he asked when he was getting wheeled into hospital? Can you give me vaccine now please.
So, after the doctors scared the crap out of him, to weaken his resolve, he gave in to the fear, and accepted the narrative that there is a big bad lurgy and that the jab is helpful.
It doesn't prove he really has the alleged big bad lurgy, and it doesn't prove the jab has any worthwhile improvement upon his health or longevity.
Again, not being personal, but what you've described is very similar to a Daily Mail story Hector quoted in the covid thread, a couple of weeks ago: husband didn't want to get jabbed, then fell ill, then wife expresses regret that he could've got the jab but didn't. Doesn't prove that the alleged lurgy is as they claim it is. Doesn't prove that if he'd had the jab, he would've been totally OK. Doesn't prove that the victim is even a real victim, for that matter. Doesn't actually prove a damn thing, but it serves a narrative, in an effort to mop-up some of the stragglers who've so far refused to be jabbed, but who may be susceptible to some scaremongering about other stragglers who've supposedly ended up regretting their refusal.
I don't doubt that the story you related may be true, in your circle of friends, but the point is that it doesn't actually add any proof that the mainstream narrative is true
By the way, I'm
not someone who believes all the scaremongering about jab side effects, but I'm also
not someone who believes all the scaremongering about a big bad lurgy and the supposed necessity to have a foreign substance repeatedly injected into the body in order to be safe from it, to some degree.
It is
obvious that there is ongoing psychological warfare and brazen manipulation and scaremongering going on, from multiple angles, in the public domain. It's not a simple matter of right or wrong, true or false. It's a hail of bullets from multiple directions, confusing the heck out of people. Choosing to believe one of the many camps in the fray, and then eagerly believing their claims, is missing the point by a country mile. There are far too many people saying they don't believe the mainstream narrative, but then regurgitating scaremongering
allegations about the awful, terrible side-effects of the jabs, as if they have been absolutely 100% factually proven beyond doubt.
