Francis Berger has a good post about the poor choices people have made because they fail to recognise the fundamentally evil nature of the global System, the tentacles of which spread into every area of life whether that be political, scientific, cultural, even religious. He mentions people who have willingly submitted to the peck, a thing supposedly originally intended for the most vulnerable and the elderly for whom the risks would be outweighed by the benefits, but which is now being pushed on everyone, including, incredibly, children who are effectively being asked to put themselves at risk for the sake of their elders. When a civilisation does that we can safely assume it has sunk to a new low. Of course, there are all sorts of excuses and justifications offered but the bottom line is that children are being experimented on and not for their own benefit.
The post drew from me the following comment which I also want to put here because I haven't seen this idea expressed in quite these terms elsewhere but I believe it lies behind many people's reluctance to go down this pecked path.
"The more I think about it the more I realise that the problem with the peck is not that it has all the adverse side effects it does nor that it is unnecessary for most people nor even that it might kill you. The main problem is that accepting it is an act of spiritual submission to the System. In the end all the other problems don't matter. They are certainly there and can back up spiritual resistance which is intuitively based, but the evil of the peck is that it is designed to facilitate and strengthen the mindset of God rejection. You are handing your soul over to the secular, materialistic, atheistic System. This is not final, repentance is always possible, but the further down this road you go, the harder repentance becomes.
A statement of this sort would be regarded as completely mad by most people. "It's just a vaccine." But that's the point. It isn't just a vaccine (in fact, of course, it isn't even a vaccine). It's a moral or spiritual choice and the thing itself is secondary to what it represents."
This act of spiritual submission is why some people have such a profound sense of rejection of the peck. We don't quite understand why to submit to it involves bowing down to the prince of this world and accepting him as our master but we perceive that it does. I don't pretend to know why this should be but the feeling is there on an intuitive level and it is through the intuition that God speaks to us. He is telling us about this intervention in no uncertain terms. I don't see the peck as the mark of the beast but it could bear a similar relationship to it as someone like Nero is said to have done to the antichrist. A precursor or lesser copy cut from similar cloth. The fact that the earthly powers are pushing it so hard and so desperately only lends credence to this idea.
11 comments:
Amen.
Not only is the lead up to getting jabbed deeply dehumanizing (think of the obvious lies, distortions and coercion), the final act itself reveals a type of spiritual Stockholm Syndrome. Combined with this nefarious ID/passport system, a real Mark of the Beast cannot be too far off....
Well put, William. Your point about the peck and spiritual submission really strikes at the heart of the matter.
Trace back the steps leading up to the peck and it quickly becomes apparent that every action taken thus far has had deep and nefarious spiritual implications, all of which built up to the peck. Willing and unrepentant acceptance of the peck is willing and unrepentant acceptance of the control mechanisms of the Satanic agenda.
That's just it, isn't it? All the obvious lies and distortions of the truth used to lay out the ground for the peck clearly demonstrate who or what is behind it. Problem created, solution offered but the implementation of the apparent solution was what it was all about from the beginning. No doubt this is only phase 1.
The beauty of the peck as a spiritual test is that it throws the issues into sharp focus and, for most people, admits of only a binary choice: Are you with us or against us? I would suggest that people who are at materially high risk of the birdemic should at least consider the peck, but for everyone else there is simply no reason to take a novel and experimental injection. In this way, I think the peck is a more extreme and clarifying test than even lockdowns and masks, which at least have a superficially plausible rationale.
Furthermore, the gross dishonesty and incoherence of public discourse about the peck, and the increasingly evil, spiteful, coercive and relentless manner in which it is being pushed, should be the tip-off that something is seriously wrong. (Just now at the restaurant, I overheard a man sitting alone and fuming on his cell phone about "those idiots who are letting the variants get out there.") Anyone with any spiritual awareness whatsoever must intuit that the peck program is very Bad News.
@HS "people who are at materially high risk of the birdemic should at least consider the peck"
Not even that. My evaluation is that there is nobody who would (with any predictablility) have their risk improved by any of the different pecks - on the basis of what (deliberately little) we know of them, which is full of dishonesty of course. The only sensible action is to treat the birdemic exactly like influenza - since (when the solidest data are considered) there is no discernible significant difference.
But most people are not remotely capable of making any risk assessment - for instance most people do not realize how the statistics derive from (in the early months of the birdemic) a clinical diagnosis too broad to differentiate a new disease from flu and other types of respiratory infection. And in the later parts of the birdemic a PCR test is used to define the presence of the birdemic which is not valid, has at the least has a large majority of false positive, and indeed all positives may be false.
With so much deliberate dishonesty permeating the whole 'story' from beginning and increasing, one simply cannot perform risk-benefit calculations of any validity.
Since there are so many ways in which a peck (real of fake) can harm, and since these have not even been checked for - the only sensible course of action on purely health grounds is to avoid it - just as you would avoid any powerful drug which had not been tested.
In other words - the birdemic is not a health issue - or at least not a New health issue; and the peck should be regarded as certainly net harmful, therefore its mass imposition has (in *reality*) nothing at all to do with health promotion or disease prevention.
The birdemic-peck is - just as William says - primarily a spiritual issue, and secondarily a political issue; and we need to be able to recognize it as such.
From a Christian perspective; we know that those who want to impose are certainly evil - because they lie grossly, repeatedly and manipulatively; and they deliberately induce mass fear. And we know that we ought not to collaborate with evil. So, we know what to do.
Can't trust doctors or "scientists" who are not the same religion as you; secularism is a failure, time for a great reset of starting a theocrasy and doing away with atheists.
Thank you, @BC. When you lay it out like that, I am inclined to agree.
If I may add one more thing, at the risk of being too "topical." I recently discovered that the smallpox vaccine was considered the most dangerous vaccine in the world, because it was associated with one death out of a million people who took it.
The data that the authorities have quietly made available to the public suggest that the birdemic peck is many, many times more deadly than the smallpox shot (64 times, by my crude calculations); yet it is being hailed as extremely safe, and indeed - as one doctor told me - the safest peck ever made.
The gross disconnect between the current public narrative and what was widely known and understand *before* March 2020 is evidence enough (if that is needed) that what we are being offered is evil and should be rejected as such.
For what it's worth, I have a slightly different take on this. I don't see submission as entirely a bad thing. I will take it if my government requires me to take it. Indeed, I will take it if my employer requires me to take it (I have a responsibility to support my family) What I find weird about this current phase is the *lack* of requirement - and the rush to submit despite the absence of compulsion. Is that even submission? I am not sure of the correct term. My view is that to take it under compulsion is no great spiritual harm. But to take it in the *absence* of compulsion is rather to invite the devil into one's home.
I almost wonder if this is not what it is all about. There seems to be a great push to have us accept it without compulsion. Despite their exhortations, they do not seem in a hurry to accept any responsibility for vaccination. They very much want the decision to be ours, while constantly implying our decision must be inevitable. Resorting to compulsion will perhaps represent a failure.
Those are very good points, Crosbie, and I agree with you. However, I was really talking in this post about willing submission. If one is forced to take it then personal responsibility is removed and it seems they very much want this to be our decision. As you say, compulsion would be a failure. This surely shows that it is a spiritual matter.
Just to qualify my agreement, I would like to add that, while I do acknowledge there is a big difference between willing acceptance and force it may well come to the point where we should stand firm even against coercion for as long as we possibly can. But that is purely a personal matter and the need to support the family will usually take priority even though that can be used as a kind of bargaining chip. I'm not really talking about this peck here but anticipating possible developments further down the line.
Post a Comment