reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Roll up your sleeve; this won't hurt and is good for you. I’m not letting you stick that in me. Our records show you’ve never had a technician. I’m not getting jabbed, and I’m not going to. Goodbye, and take these. I’ve heard enough.

In this video, various individuals express their strong opinions on vaccinations. Some suggest harsh measures like infecting unvaccinated people with diseases or creating concentration camps for them. Others talk about refusing medical assistance or wishing harm upon those who choose not to get vaccinated. The video also includes statements from politicians and healthcare professionals who express their frustration and desire for unvaccinated individuals to suffer consequences. Overall, the video showcases extreme viewpoints on the topic of vaccinations.

It's time to stop coddling those who refuse to get vaccinated. They are afraid, plain and simple. We need to stop using euphemisms like "vaccine hesitant" or "vaccine skeptics" to describe them. They're protesting mandates and passports because they're afraid. They claim it's a personal choice or that they're waiting for more information, but it's just fear. We shouldn't sugarcoat it anymore. Apart from those with legitimate medical complications, we must stop coddling these individuals. They are snowflakes, cowards, idiots, losers, and above all, afraid.

Speaker 0 excitedly asks if they can get free fries for getting vaccinated. They mention a burger element as well. They encourage people to associate vaccination with delicious food. The speaker acknowledges that they didn't get vaccinated, but someone else did. They end the video abruptly with a strong statement.

Speaker 0: I don't have it because I don't want it. Speaker 1: I don't trust you. I need proof of vaccination to exist. Some of us resist the lies and pseudoscience on TV. The government abuses power, confuses and scares people. I may be wrong, but I won't complain. I'm a singer who uses my brain and middle finger. I won't take anything. Vaccine passports won't affect me. Hell no, I won't get it. Hell no, I don't trust the government. Hell no, I won't comply.

The speaker discusses rabies and vaccines in a conspiratorial frame, arguing that rabies is fake and that the treatment and vaccine are worse than the disease. They state that the vaccine is claimed to be mandatory, but argue that mandating is “voluntary to a service” and that the true situation is a game where “mandatory” only applies once you agree to it. They claim the test for rabies is the same as used during the pandemic, asserting that “the fruit came up positive for an illness,” and suggest that this demonstrates that “we’ve been lied to,” with implications that vets benefit from the situation. The speaker recounts an historical diagnostic method: in the early nineteen hundreds, rabbits were the primary diagnostic tool to determine if an animal had rabies. They describe a procedure where, if a person was bitten by a suspected dog, “the brain tissue of the dog was injected into the two rabbits,” and “If the two rabbits died, rabies was proven.” They present this as the science behind rabies diagnosis. They then criticize the vaccine’s safety, claiming “that vaccine comes with a lot of side effects.” They cite an example case: “38 dogs and cats took the new vaccine that was made out by Merck,” and claim that these subjects “started having seizures, aggression, and death,” concluding with the statement that the vaccine is portrayed as “Safe and effective” by others. On a path to alternatives, the speaker says you could find a holistic vet who will give a medical exemption so you don’t have to receive the vaccine, or you could simply say no. They claim that if a vet “doesn’t wanna play ball,” you can make them sign a vaccination guarantee that nothing will happen to your animal after taking the injection, and predict that the vet “won’t sign it.” The segment ends with a provocative note encouraging skepticism about viruses, followed by the assertion that if you are unvaccinated and the virus enters your community, the virus will … (the clip ends here with an incomplete thought, implying a cautionary consequence).

The speakers discuss rabies and vaccinations in a provocative, conspiratorial frame. They claim rabies is nonexistent and that the treatment, the vaccine, is worse than the disease. They question the idea of compulsory vaccination, asserting that mandates are voluntary until you agree to them, and describe mandates as a game. They compare the rabies test to the pandemic-era testing method, suggesting the test for rabies relies on tests that produced positive results for illnesses, implying deception. They note that in the early 1900s, rabbits were the primary diagnostic tool: brain tissue from a suspected dog injected into two rabbits; if the rabbits died, rabies was proven. They present the vaccine as having many side effects and cite an instance where 38 dogs and cats given a Merck vaccine experienced seizures, aggression, and death, labeling the vaccine “Safe and effective” as something they dispute. They propose solutions: finding a holistic veterinarian who can grant a medical exemption, or simply saying no to vaccination. They claim it’s possible to make a vet sign a vaccination guarantee that nothing will happen to an animal after the injection, and suggest vets won’t sign such a guarantee. The conversation closes with a clip asserting that if you are unvaccinated, the virus will hunt you out or find you, repeating the claim that the virus will locate unvaccinated individuals. Overall, the dialogue presents a skepticism toward rabies biology and vaccination, asserts that vaccines have harmful side effects, questions mandates, and promotes exemptions or refusals, culminating in the assertion that viruses target the unvaccinated.

A trucker expresses hesitation about getting vaccinated, stating they aren't afraid of death but are afraid of "a boo boo on my arm." The trucker identifies as a "big mean trucker" and uses defiant language. They claim to not be afraid of anything, except possibly "septicute tip up my nose." The message is identified as coming from "big bad truckers afraid of needles," or "truckers against vaccine mandates."

The speaker criticizes those who refuse to get vaccinated, portraying them as victims. They blame the unvaccinated for the current situation and express frustration towards their perceived lack of unity. The speaker argues that the unvaccinated are a minority and questions why they should have the same rights as the vaccinated. They suggest that the unvaccinated should face consequences such as exclusion from society, fines, and potential job loss. The speaker also warns that similar rules may eventually apply to those who are vaccinated.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of getting vaccinated, stating that those who refuse to do so are putting everyone at risk. They criticize the anti-vaxxers, describing them as a small fringe element that rejects science and resorts to racist and misogynistic attacks. The speaker asserts that these individuals should not have the power to influence government policies. They make it clear that if someone chooses not to get vaccinated, they should not expect to travel alongside vaccinated individuals and endanger them. The speaker urges others to condemn and correct these anti-vaxxers, expressing their unwavering commitment to the truth supported by science.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of getting vaccinated, stating that those who refuse to do so are putting everyone at risk. They criticize the anti-vaxxers, calling them a small fringe element that rejects science and resorts to racist and misogynistic attacks. The speaker asserts that these individuals do not have the power to dictate government policy. They urge people to get vaccinated if they want to travel on planes or trains with vaccinated individuals. The speaker encourages condemning and correcting those who oppose vaccination, and they express their determination to stand firm in their beliefs based on scientific evidence.

The speaker briefly mentions a person who is afraid of getting vaccinated. They express concern for this individual and mention that they went to a certain place and then back again. The speaker ends by saying "Oh God, it's a pity for him, how scared he is."

Speaker 0 claims that people lie about tetanus and rabies, asserting that rabies doesn’t exist and that dogs are poisoned. They allege veterinarians administer 13 vaccinations to keep the veterinary industry in business, and that the first vaccination against dogs was injected into their brains, followed by more vaccines to sustain the vets. They describe the entire system as intended to keep “these terrorists in business” who constantly poison people and animals, and they state that if a vet truly cared about an animal, they wouldn’t inject it. The speaker asserts that injections of poisons into animals would not lead to health, applying this logic to horses, cats, and wildlife as well. They claim wildlife are vaccinated by the government, referencing deer “spinning around in circles” in the forest as evidence. The call is for people to be aware and to say no, defending their dogs, cats, and even their grandmother, framing it as a constitutional right. They urge listeners to resist vaccination or other medical interventions for family and animals, insisting on a stance of defiance against forced measures. The speaker emphasizes personal agency and the obligation to defend family and animals, portraying vaccination as coercive and harmful. They allude to expressing censored language that would condemn the alleged actions, but refrain from explicit terms. The overall message is a condemnation of vaccines and veterinary practice, framed as a political and constitutional violation, and a directive to resist vaccination and to advocate for personal choice.

The speaker's message to unvaccinated Americans is: what more is there to wait for? Vaccinations are free, safe, and convenient, and the vaccine has FDA approval. Over 200 million Americans have gotten at least one shot. The speaker states that patience is wearing thin, and refusal to vaccinate has cost everyone. The speaker urges people to do the right thing and listen to unvaccinated Americans in hospital beds taking their final breaths, saying, "if only I'd gotten vaccinated." The speaker concludes by saying, "It's a tragedy. Please don't let it become yours."

It's time to stop coddling those who won't get the vaccine. They're afraid, not hesitant or skeptical. No more sugarcoating. They're scared of the vaccine, being wrong, following rules, and needles. Except for those with medical issues, we must stop coddling these individuals and call them what they are: snowflakes, cowards, idiots, losers, and most importantly, afraid.

In this video, the speaker expresses their strong opposition to Joe Biden's statement about the need for a new vaccine and mandatory vaccinations. They assert their freedom and refuse to be forced into taking anything. The speaker warns against anyone trying to enforce such measures, emphasizing that they will fight back. They criticize both the Democratic Party and Republicans who are not actively opposing these actions. The speaker's message is clear: they will not be dictated to and will not tolerate any infringement on their personal choices.

The speaker's message to unvaccinated Americans is: what more is there to wait for? Vaccinations are free, safe, and convenient, and the vaccine has FDA approval. Over 200 million Americans have gotten at least one shot. The speaker states that patience is wearing thin, and refusal to vaccinate has cost everyone. The speaker urges people to do the right thing and listen to unvaccinated Americans in hospitals taking their final breaths, saying, "if only I'd gotten vaccinated." The speaker concludes by saying, "It's a tragedy. Please don't let it become yours."

The transcript describes a study conducted at Yale University nine months before a COVID-19 vaccine was available, in which researchers tested different messaging strategies to influence willingness to vaccinate once vaccines existed. The setting is described as the “CI supercenter at the end of university world” and includes vocal commentary criticizing Yale as a pretext for psychological operations. Key context and timeline: - In July 2020, nine months before a COVID-19 vaccine was available in the general public. - The first COVID-19 vaccines were announced four months later and available nine months after July 2020. - The rollout began with all US states opening vaccine eligibility to residents 16 or over on 04/19/2021. - The study involved 4,000 participants around Yale and examined messaging about vaccinating against COVID-19 once the vaccine became available, comparing reported willingness to get a vaccine at three and six months after it became available. Study design and interventions: - The sample was randomly assigned to different messaging conditions and a control. - Control condition (about birds) is described as a baseline sham comparator with a passage on the cost and benefits of bird feeding. - A “baseline message” emphasized safety and effectiveness, described as “the exact words that were rolled out: Safe and effective, safe and effective, safe and effective.” - Other messages tested included: - Personal freedom message: COVID-19 is limiting personal freedom; by working together to get enough people vaccinated, society can preserve its personal freedom. - Economic freedom message: COVID-19 is limiting economic freedom; by working together, society can preserve its economic freedom. - Self-interest message: COVID-19 presents a real danger to one’s health even if one is young and healthy; getting vaccinated is the best way to prevent sickness. - Community interest message: Dangers of COVID-19 to the health of loved ones; get your loved ones vaccinated. - Economic benefit message: COVID-19 is wreaking havoc on the economy; the only way to strengthen the economy is to vaccinate. - Guilt message: The danger that COVID-19 presents the health of one’s family and community; the best way to protect them is by getting vaccinated; society must work together; participants are asked to imagine the guilt they would feel if they don’t get vaccinated and spread the disease. - Embarrassment message: The danger that COVID-19 presents the health of one’s family and community; participants are asked to imagine the embarrassment they will feel if they don’t get vaccinated and spread the disease. - Anger message: Test of the emotion of anger to see what can be stirred to increase compliance. - Trust in science message: Vaccination is backed by science; “Trust the science” (noting the paradox that science had not produced a vaccine at that point). - Brave message: Firefighters, doctors, and frontline workers are brave; those who choose not to get vaccinated are not brave. The commentary emphasizes “I got a big fat fucking bird for you” in reference to the putative study. Notable commentary: - The speaker interjects provocative remarks about Yale, the CIA, and pharmaceutical companies, describing the project as testing whether guilt or other emotions are more powerful than economics, and repeatedly condemning the pre-vaccine testing of messages meant to precondition people emotionally. Overall takeaway: - Nine months before any vaccine existed, Yale tested a range of messaging strategies—ranging from safety claims to appeals to personal, economic, and communal impacts, plus guilt, embarrassment, anger, trust in science, and bravery—to predict or influence willingness to vaccinate once vaccines were available.

The speaker did not get vaccinated for COVID-19 and will not get vaccinated for monkeypox. The speaker is starting the "second pandemic of the unvaccinated." The speaker wants liberals vaccinated, boosted, and wearing masks. The speaker says conservatives will continue to make money, shoot guns, and fight to make America great again. The speaker tells patrons not to reply.

The speaker expresses frustration and anger towards the idea of getting vaccinated and following COVID-19 safety measures. They use strong language to criticize masks, vaccines, booster shots, the Omicron variant, and vaccine passports. The speaker also mentions the Wuhan lab and Pfizer. The transcript abruptly ends with a mention of prison.

The speaker expresses concerns about the potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, particularly blood clots and myocarditis. They criticize the vaccine rollout and question its safety. They mention the impact on their family and express their reluctance to take another shot. The speaker ends by declaring their refusal to comply with the vaccine.

The speaker asserts that fellow Americans are the biggest enemy and the unvaccinated cannot be trusted. They state that now is the time to do what you're told, and it's not about freedom or personal choice. The speaker expresses frustration, stating that the refusal to vaccinate has cost everyone. One speaker contrasts the treatment of a vaccinated person having a heart attack with an unvaccinated person who took "horse goo." The speaker claims the unvaccinated overcrowd hospitals, overrun emergency rooms and ICUs, leaving no room for others. They call the unvaccinated "schmucks" and claim this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated and their freedom.

The speaker salutes unvaccinated individuals, calling them courageous for standing against a trillion-dollar propaganda machine and telling the government, bosses, jobs, and businesses to "off." The speaker believes everyone had a choice regarding vaccination, even if it meant facing tough decisions like losing a job, business, or family. They claim that vaccinated individuals "sold their soul" for a price, while the unvaccinated lost everything but kept their integrity. The speaker generally distrusts vaccinated people and trusts unvaccinated people. They believe that in a future pandemic, vaccinated individuals will throw others under the bus to protect themselves, their jobs, money, and titles.

The speaker states they are "physically taking" the vaccine, not receiving it as intended. They claim the National Action Task Force will send the substance to a lab to test what "they're poisoning everybody with." The speaker says they have to leave because the police are being called. They express dislike for being combative but hate "that they're doing this to people," who are lined up to receive it. The speaker reiterates they are "taking" the vaccine "for the greater good of everyone" because they are going to test it in a lab to see what it is. The speaker states they are shaking and nervous.

The speaker expresses a nuanced view on vaccines, stating a belief in their importance while opposing mandatory vaccination for all vaccines. They highlight the polio vaccine as amazing and credited with wiping out the disease, illustrating support for vaccines in general but not for compulsory mandates. They point out that there are about 88 vaccines, suggesting that some could be cut back or administered in smaller quantities. The speaker contrasts the high number with examples from other countries, noting Denmark and others have significantly fewer vaccines (12, 14, or up to 17). They emphasize their own preference for reducing the vaccine load. A vivid image is used: babies receiving “a vat” or “a big glass of stuff pumped into their bodies,” which the speaker characterizes as a negative thing. This leads to the expressed desire for a different approach, namely much smaller shots and fewer visits to the doctor. The speaker proposes that with fewer vaccinations and fewer medical visits, outcomes could be improved. They specifically mention four doctor visits as a desired target, implying that this reduction could lead to better health results. Finally, the speaker links this approach to autism, stating the belief that the proposed changes—smaller shots and fewer visits—would yield a much better result with autism. The remarks indicate a direct connection between the vaccination approach described and autism outcomes, presented as a conclusion of their viewpoint. Overall, the transcript captures a stance that supports vaccines in principle and acknowledges their success (polio), but argues against mandatory universal vaccination and for a substantially reduced vaccine schedule and medical visits, with an asserted positive impact on autism outcomes. The speaker compares U.S. vaccination totals to those of Denmark and other countries to underscore the perceived excess, advocating for smaller, fewer-dose regimens administered over fewer clinical visits.