Check the links
Conclude what you will
Act accordingly


https://nojabforme.info

"The FDA did not approve Moderna or Pfizer mRNA gene therapeutics they dubbed "vaccines". It simply authorized them."

 Did I know?  Yes because that is what has been said since day 1.



"The clinical trials will be completed in 2023, and there are 12 vaccine companies working on profiting from vaccine sales"

 Did I know?  Yes, actually it was 17 but some dropped out.  



"The FDA & CDC have not revealed to the public over 20 adverse effects, including Death, related to Covid19 vaccines, which were discussed in an October 2020 meeting. "


 Did I know?  Yes, because they actually are listed in the Working list of Adverse Event outcomes, the data lag times vary but are disclosed an it changes.  Oh wait I forgot, if an Organization discloses something in writing and somebody else lies to you about it then the Organization lied.  Not the person that actually lied.



"The mRNA jab delivers a synthetic, inorganic molecule (medical device) that programs your cells to synthesize pathogens in the form of the spike protein that your immune system will constantly have to fight off for the rest of your life, according to experts such as Molecular Biologist & Immunologist, Professor Dolores Cahill. She explains. Fauci confirms. Dr. Lee Merritt reconfirms."

 Did I know?  I know this is misleading hoping nobody reads the references.  I do know that mRNA itself is not a new invention from the lab it is naturally found in every cell in your body.  mRNA is destroyed by the cell, mRNA cannot get into the cell nucleus and it cannot affect a person’s DNA, we have know this for years.




"The mRNA jab does not prevent you from contracting Covid19 or from transmitting it."

 Did I know?  Yes.  Because I know what efficacy means.  Again because that's what we have been told all along.  This nonsense of refusing to look at information from certain sources, then turning around blaming them for not telling the truth is moronic at best.

 I won't read a CDC document.

 I create opinion on subject based off of a YouTube video with no references, or at least one's I won't actually look at.  

 I blame the CDC for lying to me because my opinion was formed from someplace other than the CDC's actual documentation.

 I use the document I still won't read as proof.


 If you don't want a vaccine that's fine, but this practice of trying to make this very public and very available information seem like it's been some secret is bull$hit.

"I do know people who are under the impression that this "vaccine" is no different from the shots they got as kids for polio smallpox etc. even though it obviously isn't.

That impression is not because the information isn't readily available though.

I'm not advocating for or against getting some form of the Covid shot. That's a decision everyone should make for themselves."


 I agree.

 I'm obviously not a fan of people making up bullsh!t to persuade people to make one decision or the other.  

 For instance one should make their own opinion about this: "3,186 deaths from Covid19 vaccines are reported by the National Vaccine Information Center as at 4/16/2021, and one-third of the deaths occurred within 48 hours."

 But they left out that 232,000,000 people in the US have received a vaccine.  97,000,000 are fully vaccinated.  So 3,186 deaths seems large but to most people not compared to 232 million.  If homicide or auto accident death (about 104 auto deaths per day) was that low we would be ecstatic.  At least with comparative numbers we can make an informed decision, whereas JoG's reference provides a misleading narrative.  But at least they provide references hoping nobody actually reads them.



 I liked this part "Anyone trying to take down this site will be named as codefendant in Nuremberg 2.0 for being an accomplice to crimes against humanity. That includes social media. Lawyers are standing by."

 Sure that's how this works. Good luck on that one.

"That go both ways ?"

 Absolutely.  The difference is I can reference the lies posted and in turn reference the contradictory information.  In this case are there references where the CDC said the vaccine "cures" C-19?  Or is that all from other sources?  When I indicate stopthejab is misleading you can go read those words for yourself, stated by stopthejab, not other people.



"Like, IMPLYING, that deaths by heart/diabetes/cancer/etc/etc/etc are c-19 ?"

 Only if you can not understand the difference between dying "from" C-19 and dying "with" C-19.  This is easy to be convinced of when people refuse to look at an actual real document and watch youTube instead.  I think the actual statements are being manipulated because people won't read for themselves.   This statement is very clear:  "The conditions that led to the immediate cause of death should be reported in a logical sequence in terms of time and etiology below it."  

"Because laboratory test results are not typically reported on death certificates in the U.S., NCHS is not planning to implement U07.2 for mortality statistics. "

 How are the words "not planning" implying that they are actively doing this?  



"Like, IMPLYING, that the ‘vaccines’ are,
FDA, APPROVED
Not, ‘temporally authorized’?"

 Can you provide a reference where the CDC or vaccine developer "implies" this and does not very directly say that it is "not" FDA approved?  Not other sources, the actual CDC, or the actual vaccine companies?   Oh yeah if somebody else implies a mistruth about something I said, I am actually the liar.  Not the person who altered my words.



"Like, IMPLYING, the shot makes you immune,
Or cures you ?"

 Can you provide a reference where the CDC or vaccine manufacturer "implies" that the shot "immunizes" or "cures" you?  Not other sources, the actual groups that are being accused of this.  Oh wait, but it was ok to claim hydroxychloroquine was a "proven cure" using those actual words, (not implying, but actually using those words) without evidence except that Trump takes it, and then he got C-19.  Real good "cure" when you still get the disease.



"By, IMPLYING, their will be no, ‘vaccine passport’, for domestic travel.
When it is getting closer every day ?"

 How is it getting closer?  I am only aware of the statements that there is no proposals for a national vaccine passport.  


 I'm all for holding the CDC/Vaccine manufacturers accountable for being inaccurate or manipulative, but I would need to see reference and not just statements of things that might have maybe been said.  

Exactly:

Read between the lines. Read the SPIN !
“…White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Monday there will be no federal mandate requiring every American to obtain a vaccination credential …”
            Simply because they KNOW than cannot.
HOWEVER,  The puppet masters want, that you can’t go into a bar/restaurant/movie/car/mall/etc. etc. etc with out one, because Ding-z-Dong the puppet, gives out the licenses to those places, and will ‘mandate’ that ‘place’ can ONLY accept people that have a, ‘vaccine passport’.  So you don’t have to have one, BUT, if you want to do any of those things, you will, HAVE to have one !

NY state'e "Excelsior Pass" is already operational.
https://covid19vaccine.health.ny.gov/excelsior-pass

So many people have already downloaded the app that there are already reports on the local news here in Rochester that folks are getting error messages saying that " sorry, we can't seem to find the record of your vaccination. Please contact whomever the f**k gave you the shot(s), ask them to straighten this out, and try again. Very sorry for the inconvenience".

SOP for New York I'm afraid.

Other states, Florida, Texas and, I think, S. Dakota are working on laws to make such a thing illegal in those states.

Civil War of the Covid passports coming right up.

Quote:

Do you think that is the only reason people are moving Out Of, Calf, NY, IL in droves?

Quote:


Read the last 1/3 of reply #7
Just after; "Read between the lines"

The puppet masters want, that you can’t go into a bar/restaurant/movie/car/mall/etc. etc. etc with out one, because Ding-z-Dong the puppet, gives out the licenses to those places, and will ‘mandate’ that ‘place’ can ONLY accept people that have a, ‘vaccine passport’.  So you don’t have to have one, BUT, if you want to do any of those things, you will, HAVE to have one !


 I'd agree if the Federal Government "required" this.  They do not.

 Providing the guidelines could be a potential workaround but only if it is, or can be, enforced.  Since it isn't being enforced and without very intense resource allocation could not be enforced I am still thinking that there is no Federal vaccine passport mandate.

 If enforcement measures start, I would change my opinion.

 As for the original post I still can't find information from the CDC, not other sources, that are implying or in any way stating information contradictory to what the vaccines are can do.

"Amazing, I had 10+ 'quote's' from the CDC.
     IMPLYING !!!!!!!
But suddenly that post in progress,
    simply disappeared !!!!!!"

 
 That's convenient.  



And the many were variants of this:
"...After approving a vaccine, FDA continues to oversee its production to ensure continuing safety..."

 So you mean "after approval" not, "Approved".  So where is the information that the CDC is saying the vaccines are already approved?  Not other sources, the CDC, FDA, or vaccine manufacturers.  Your provided statement indicates approval has not yet happened.


 Your quote comes from the following source, and it does not say the FDA has approved a C-19 vaccine.  

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/basics/test-approve.html


 
"Spin again, how that/they are,
   NOT IMPLYING !!!!!!!"

 Because documentation says "not approved".  How can you think that implies approval?

 The paperwork that comes with a vaccine consent says not approved by the FDA.  How does that mean it is actually approved?

 I understand and would be willing to accept the idea that the CDC is saying the vaccine is FDA approved, or is implying it, but anyone can say they have 100's of sources and not provide any.