Ernst Kuipers, Milgram and the hot potato of responsibility

People are capable of horrible acts if someone assures them that they do not have to bear the responsibility of those actions themselves. In 1963 that was scientifically demonstrated in the famous Milgram's experiment. We now see such an experiment taking place before our eyes, with Ernst Kuipers in the lead.

He also explains that RIVM keeps a close eye on the costs/benefit analysis and cannot advise a vaccination on this basis for use with 60-miners. The same RIVM that writes in the last report that "in the eight weeks after vaccination there is a reduced risk of death, compared to the risk without this vaccindosis." You apparently become mainly healthier, at least you lower the chance of death. Black and white. Why that hesitation? Is there perhaps something happening after that 8 -week period? The report is silent about that.

For good understanding: it is exactly the same puncture as the previous three punctures with which 13 million Dutch people were injected, sometimes grateful, sometimes under pressure, usually indifferent. The reluctance of Kuipers is exactly the same shot that the government has pushed through its talk shows night after night. A medicine for which hundreds of hours of advertising has been made, product placing, nudging, documentaries, IC front messages, fake journalism-everything, really everything is pulled out of the propaganda cabinet. Government advisers, ministers, Dutch celebrities, editor-in-chief, employers-did not let them pass by whether this identical agent, already given three rounds and for which Kuipers does not dare to put his hand in the fire at a fourth time, was put down as "the only way out". Those who did not take it were an antisocial, a stupid head, a rejected one, was held, canceled or considered dangerous. Not everyone (luckily) but it was controlled. I charge? No, I don't really believe it.

Finally it was able to prove itself - the data are in - and now they suddenly hold in. It is this vaccine that Kuipers does not dare to advise now because he can be held responsible "if there are any side effects [" would be " - I just fill it up, he has trouble saying it]."

Pardon!? So as long as he was not responsible (or not explicitly pointed to his responsible, who knows), he didn't really care what Burgers was injected time and time again. Public health aspects apparently did not count. He was covered and not now, that's the difference.

So the puncture was not that safe. They were not wappie stories, of those side effects. They were also not as rare as Lareb prevented. But if something was said about that, it was fake news, the smearing of holy state science.

Disabling the Moral Compass

Responsibility is really a kind of box that you can give to someone else and then you are away. Especially don't look in. Morality, concern, empathy, common sense, guilt consciousness - that all plays no role. If there is a signature somewhere, then the conscience may get out. Should that go, even. A threat of punishment suddenly switches on the conscience again.

That makes you think. Had the OMT members, Farma representatives and other medical people never advised the vaccinations if they were held responsible? The bad thing is: probably, in blind trust. They must have been punctured, just like their children and other loved ones.

We know that the pharmaceuticals are contractually dismissed from their responsibility. After all, that vaccine had to come, at all costs, because the authorities wanted to show that they could act adequately in times of distraught panic. Panic caused by experimenting virologists who saw their business go up in smoke and wanted to kick off the fire quickly. They (governments and virologists) also missed the vision to estimate the final effects of their actions.

However, the vaccine was not finished at the time. It had been working on it for years, together with a discreet group of top virologists and a Chinese laboratory, sponsored with secret US dollars from Fauci. All those involved realized that the vaccine in this state could not be approved, so a construct was devised that everyone could agree with: the "Eua", permission for use in an emergency situation. (I keep it short, read the series “Ask MarionFrom Jan Bonte for detailed information or read this shorter article. Robert Kennedy also writes about this in his undisputed indictment against Fauci, link below.)

Now that the pharmaceuticals were no longer responsible, who was it? Maybe the next station: the FDA. But Fauci had no reason to worry, it had already left with multiple murder. (source: Robert Kennedy, € 3.34). The top virologists were safe under his umbrella. Supervisors were and are paid by the pharmacists, with limitless faith in the reputation of previous vaccines, supported by Bill Gates and strongly encouraged by governments (we hear Paulusma ask again whether Kuipers wants to exert his influence on the scientific process). Everything was arranged in a curse and a sigh. For the entire chain under that, the responsibility was removed: the word "approval" had fallen, they were allowed to roll it out. The chain was secured: every white coat could rely on the white jacket above it.

That chosen path turned out to be too narrow. And many have made decisions with which they also passed a point of no return for themselves.

Retreating movements

After all, she is not a leader or adviser, she is only chairman. Making it discussable, that was the first step. Then create support ... if that does not work, a different perspective, etc. That's how it works.

A few weeks ago, Věra Jourová claimed from the European Commission:

"We have the people never put under pressure to be vaccinated as a condition for access to public services or health services [...] The EU has never issued a law or obligation to vaccination. "

Věra Jourová, European Commission:

The EC therefore makes a receding movement. At the same time, case law starts. There are examples of vaccine victims who are granted compensation to be paid by the government, there are also examples of insurance policies refusing claims of vaccination damage because the patient has voluntarily opted for the risk. So many countries, so many legal systems. It will be seen which way it will roll. Recognition of vaccination damage will still cause the necessary problems, also in the Netherlands: look at how the state deals with Groningen and with the allowance affair.

It is also clear why Hugo de Jonge was so firm: "Vaccination enforcement, you shouldn't want that. So we won't do that." Two reasons were behind this: 1) It does not fit in a free democracy (Yeah Right) and 2) If we force it, we are responsible. But "urge", that could possibly be in a free democracy.

And now, in addition to the EU, we also have Kuipers who is not (anymore) unconditionally responsible for the vaccines. If he himself was convinced of the massive life-saving effect and it saw as a boost for public health, then he would now have to go through rowing and the windows for the shot he has been pushing as an OMT member and as a minister for two years. Compare that with the doctors and scientists who continue to compete for the use of ivermectin - Kuipers is clearly not possible.

It sounds rather as if he doesn't have to do much personally. If others necessarily want it, I am guest - he says - but I would rather let this cup pass me by.

The desperation of the individual

Huisarts Frank Roodenburg Seems around what goes wrong with the vaccinations and keeps the studies good. He is almost alone in his concern, so that he has lost contact with his profession, he told at Blackbox (look from 53:30).

His colleagues, both general practitioners and specialists, even had their children vaccinated and stayed as quickly as possible. Experiencing self -dragging mismanagement and the persistent inability to do something about it often leads to radicalization. You become more and more pronounced (I recognize it).

Roodenburg calls the vaccination as a "poison spray" and is convinced of a depopulation plan. He states that his colleagues "block" because they don't get it spiritually that they have damaged their children. They cannot possibly rhyme with their intentions, their belief in the medical hierarchy on which their existence is built - in short, it does not fit in their own identity. What should you think of yourself if you have endangered your children? As a doctor? If you have caused the death of a number of patients? That cannot indeed be knit. The mind then stands still and will maintain until the bitter end that it was really the only right thing to do. Perhaps it will be added later: "- At least at that time, we didn't know any better". Some do.

Maar ook bij huisarts Roodenburg zelf stokt het verstand, net zo begrijpelijk. Hij vermoedt een depopulatieplan van de elite. Ik snap dat in zoverre, dat het dermate ernstig is dat je het redelijkerwijs niet meer als een misstap kunt beschouwen. En zeker niet nu de lijn stug wordt doorgetrokken terwijl er steeds meer rode vlaggen staan te wapperen. Maar toch klopt zijn eigen gedachtengang ook niet.

Hij veronderstelt dat zijn collega-medici uit goede bedoelingen handelden. Hij denkt er echter anders over zodra het gaat om mensen en processen die zich buiten zijn blikveld verbinden. Maar hoe zit het dan bijvoorbeeld met ziekenhuisdirecteuren? Professoren? Het OMT, het NHG? Het NTVG? De goedkeurende gezondheidsinstanties zoals het CBG? rivm, EMA, KNAW, NTVG en hun toezichthouders? Het is overal van hetzelfde laken een pak. Mensen zijn bang en onzeker gemaakt, vallen terug op autoriteiten, op zekerheden uit het verleden (vaccins) en er is geen reden om aan te nemen dat dat niet doortrekt tot Gates en Fauci zelf: ze geloven waarschijnlijk werkelijk dat het uiteindelijk toch echt de beste richting is die zij hebben gekozen en hebben zich ook laten vaccineren.

Desondanks construeert Roodenburg een beeld van Illuminati op wie dat proces om de een of andere reden geen vat zou hebben. En die zouden dan verder iedereen eronder een rad voor ogen hebben kunnen draaien.

Dat gaat er bij mij gewoon niet in, dat krijg ik dan weer niet rond. Alsof dat dan ineens géén oude mensen zijn die zich snel hebben laten vaccineren… Nee: de slechterikken, die zitten in onszelf.

Het zijn opwindende tijden. Ik begon met een ‘experiment’ maar eigenlijk beleven we een Bond-film. “Vie vil pennetreet ze kebbinets”. Hoe spannend wil je het hebben.