Article Image

IPFS News Link • Science, Medicine and Technology

Why Diapers Are Dangerous

• Eric Peters Auto

The Diapers by themselves are loathsome. People wearing them look like neurotics – the same neurotics. Diapers efface individuality. They turn people into NPC characters in a sick actual reality game.

They are alienating, unhealthy – medically and psychologically.

But they are more than merely Diapers – as ought to be apparent.

Given that there is no persuasive medical reason to wear a Face Diaper (much less a dirty bandana) the obvious conclusion is that the insistence on covering the face is to efface the face. To submerge the individual into a collective of faceless, interchangeable players who have surrendered their individuality for the sake of obedience

Diapers are training tools.

They are meant to habituate people to the "new normal" – which will include management by the corporate-government nexus to a degree we probably can't yet fully comprehend. Diaper acceptance will lead to Needling acceptance, which will not even require laws.

All that it will take is policies – as per Diapers.

The same corporations which deny service to the Undiapered will deny service – and employment – to those who refuse the vaccine. People who don't submit will simply be excluded, as now. No job, no shop. Perhaps no food. They will be herded onto reservations of a sort – i.e., their homes, which they won't be allowed to leave or rather which there will be no point in leaving since there's nowhere to go and nothing to do.

The corporate-government nexus will wait you out – perhaps starve you out.

It will be almost impossible to resist unless you go Amish. Those who aren't able to live on virtually no income,  who can produce their own food, etc. will be the only holdouts.

Everyone else who works for a company – which is almost everyone – will be required to submit to the Needle just as they have been forced to submit to the Diaper, which they submitted to because they had already submitted to things like mandatory drug tests as a condition of employment – which they had to submit to, since all employers require them now, just about.

No laws needed.

Corporations – and policies – have replaced laws.

This is ingenious. And it isn't new.

After nahhhhnlevven and even before then, as the development of technology made possible the unimaginable, the federal government figured out that it could bypass aggravations such as the laws which restricted to some degree what it could do to the people – for example, mass surveil them – by having private contractors do the dirty work instead. Some will recall the private armies of mercenaries- and torturers – created under the auspice of Blackwater as a for-instance. What the U.S. Army couldn't do, the goons of Blackwater could.

Fast forward twenty years.

The government doesn't censor speech. But private companies are very effectively suppressing it – which amounts to the same as these private companies have near-monopoly control of the means by which information is disseminated. To paraphrase what der Stellvertreter once said of his boss: Gurgle ist communication just as communication ist Gurgle!

No laws needed to "de-platform" or "de-monetize" you. The First Amendment still applies – but only to the government. How much free speech do you have at work? Ask the people who work at Goodyear.

thelibertyadvisor.com/declare