Viral footage out of Brazil shows three scenes happening at once on street cameras a husband running from his wife a cat running from a dog and a thief running from the police😭
The Afroman Trial.
-Cops raid Afromans house for bullshit reasons.
-Steal money, break his door, fuck his house up.
-No criminality found whatsoever, no charges at all pressed on Afroman.
-Afroman spends the next 3 years making songs that make fun of all the officers involved by name, even using footage of the raid from his own CCTV cameras.
-Songs had titles like "Randy Walters is a son of a bitch" and "Lick Em Low Lisa" accusing one of the officers of being a lesbian and sleeping with the other officers wives.
-During the raid one officer looked like he was about to eat some lemon pound cake sitting on Afromans counter, Afroman made a whole album calling the officer fat.
-The cops get mad and file a lawsuit for defamation.
-Afroman turns up to court in a whole American flag suit.
-Officers performatively mald and cry while listening to the songs really trying to oversell how badly the songs upset them.
-One officer was suing because Afroman made a whole song about him saying he was fucking the officers wife. When the officer was asked if Afroman was really fucking his wife, he said "I don't know". Nuking his own case and establishing that there is a non-zero chance that Afroman might actually be fucking his wife.
-As his only witness for the trial, Afroman brought a deputies EX FUCKING WIFE.
-The jury ruled completely in favour of Afroman.
This entire thing has been a great win for free speech and absolutely fucking hilarious.
Before Archaix. Before my company Paradise Rock Gardens. Living out of a backpack, my diet one of delis and Ramen soups, traveling on my motorcycle, homeless and refusing handouts from Dad, after release from prison I had these four meditations on my phone.
I was bereft of materials, broke, a vagabond, but my mind on fire with decades of reading, writing and thinking. And I BELIEVED.
These 7 years have been a hell of a ride and I'm not done.
Break free or die trying.
The “we can’t do a fully vaccinated vs. completely unvaccinated study because it would be unethical to withhold life-saving vaccines” argument is hilariously absurd.
It assumes vaccines are already proven safe and effective in order to justify not doing the very study designed to determine whether vaccines are safe and effective.
It is a textbook example of question begging—one of MANY logical fallacies the vaccine paradigm rests upon.
The 21 states that refused to send their SNAP data to the USDA are:
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
And, of course, Washington, D.C. is in the mix too.
These states are stonewalling because they know the fraud is massive. When you hide the books, it’s never to protect the honest folks—it’s to cover up the rot. Meanwhile, the states that did cooperate are already exposing exactly the kind of abuse the left swears doesn’t exist.
Where were the “No Kings” protestors during lockdowns, vaccine mandates & mask mandates?
I’ll tell you where. Buying the propaganda, supporting the kings, defending big Pharma, psychologically abusing kids & putting working people thru hell.
Here’s how deep the lack of evidence for vaccines goes:
There is no empirical evidence (meaning evidence that follows the scientific method) that viruses cause illness or exist as discrete, infectious particles.
No study in the history of virology has ever purified intact virus particles directly from the fluids of a sick person and then exposed healthy people to those isolated particles to show they cause illness.
Instead, studies assume viruses are present in fluids and proceed to mix those fluids with cytotoxic substances (such as amphotericin B, gentamicin, and others) along with foreign biological material (like fetal bovine serum), applied to monkey kidney cells or other cell lines. When the cells inevitably die under these toxic conditions, the breakdown products and particles are pointed to as “evidence” of viruses. No independent variable, no testable hypothesis, countless uncontrolled elements, no genuine negative control.
By definition, this does not meet the standard of science but rather pseudoscience.
There is no empirical evidence that so-called “viral genomes” have been sequenced directly from fully intact virions purified from the fluids of sick people.
What are called “viral genomes” are assembled by computer algorithms from mixed materials in unfiltered samples or cell cultures, rather than directly sequenced from purified particles.
There is no empirical evidence that specific antibodies, tied to specific so-called “viral illnesses,” causally confer lasting immune memory.
Antibodies are treated as surrogate markers of “protection,” but this presupposes the viral model of illness itself — which has not been demonstrated under strict scientific controls.
There is no empirical evidence, from double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, that healthy people become sick simply from exposure to sick people or their bodily fluids.
In countless historical human experiments (like those conducted during the Spanish flu), transmission was not demonstrated, and in some cases more illness appeared in placebo groups than in those exposed to fluids from the sick.
There is no empirical evidence that aluminum adjuvants such as aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate have been proven safe when injected, or that they causally improve overall health outcomes.
Claims of “immune activation” are based on surrogate markers (like antibody titers) that presuppose such activation is beneficial, all within the context of unproven “viral illness” models.
Modeling studies (like Mitkus) and tiny rabbit biodistribution experiments (like Flarend) do not constitute evidence of human safety or efficacy, and no double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial has ever demonstrated either.
There is no empirical evidence that any individual vaccine on the schedule has been shown safe or effective under the gold standard of science:
a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial against an inert placebo, demonstrating long-term safety and efficacy across the full spectrum of health outcomes.
There is no empirical evidence that the entire vaccine schedule given to babies/children is safe or effective.
No study exists (that is, at least no study published by those making the claims that vaccines are safe and effective) comparing a fully vaccinated group to a completely unvaccinated group.