Watch as WaPo spews pure propaganda to discredit the anti-forced-vax protest in DC yesterday

Whooooeee!  Duh fascist thugs at the WaPo--and every other lying Mainstream Media outlet--bees spinnin' like crazy!  If you expect to take back your country you need to see how FAST, how THOROUGHLY and how COMPELLINGLY the propagandists spin up their product when the Good Folks dare to defy the rulers!

Of course you almost certainly think that's hyperbole--that the Good People are the caring, tolerant, scientifically-literate leftists who run the Mainstream Media, who would NEVER lie to you, or use propaganda.  I mean, if you've got truth on your side, there's no need to use propaganda, right?  You just invite the other side to a fair debate, and let everyone listen and decide who's right!

But the WaPo and NYT don't do that.  You might well wonder why.

SO...I've dissected the Post's article below, "Anti-vaccine activists see D.C. rally as a marker of recent gains", a line at a time, and will show you how they constantly use psychology to mislead readers.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/anti-vaccine-activists-reveling-in-their-pandemic-successes-will-rally-in-dc-against-mandates/ar-AAT0re7
===

As anti-vaccine activists from across the country prepare to gather on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday, they're hoping their rally will mark a once-fringe movement’s arrival as a lasting force in American society.

That hope, some public health *experts fear,* is justified.

[Hey, if the totally-honest "reporters" tell you "the experts" "FEAR" something--and you unthinkingly believe it--you just got sold.]

Almost two years into the coronavirus pandemic, the movement to challenge vaccines’ safety — and reject vaccine mandates — has never been stronger. An ideology whose most notable adherents were once **religious fundamentalists** and *minor* celebrities is now firmly entrenched among tens of millions of Americans.

[Note how early in the article the Post has welded anyone who dares to question the lies Fauci and the CDC have told us about duh vax with "religious fundamentalists." The Post doesn't have to tell you that "religous fundamentalists" are uneducated and stupid, cuz they sold you on that decades ago.  Remember how they sneered about "Deplorables bitterly clinging to their guns and their God"?  So all the Post has to say is "religious fundamentalists" and once again...you've been sold.]

**Baseless fears** of vaccines have been a driving force among the approximately 20 percent of U.S. adults who have refused some of the most effective medicines in human history: the mRNA vaccines developed against the coronavirus by Pfizer, with German partner BioNTech, and Moderna.

[Wait...if they're "vaccines," why didn't the reporters write "the mRNA vaccines that keep the vaccinated from getting the virus, just like polio"?  They would have, but they couldn't get away with that, because after months of denying the obvious, the CDC finally admitted that the vaxxes do NOT prevent those who take 'em from getting the virus.  But wait...isn't that the very definition of a "vaccine"?  If that's true, and if the so-called "vax" does NOT do this, nor does it keep you from transmitting the virus to others, how can the Rulers legitimately keep calling it a "vaccine," eh?  (Hint: they changed the definition, last September 1st.)]

The nation that produced Jonas Salk has exported anti-vaccine propaganda around the globe, wreaking havoc on public health campaigns from Germany to Kenya.

[Invoking an iconic name, like Salk's, is a classic propaganda technique, since everyone associates Salk with the successful vaccine that essentially wiped out polio.  So naturally, readers equate Salk's vax with the mRNA "non-vax," and unconsciously assume anyone who objects to being FORCED to take the current jab rejects ALL vaxxes-- for polio, measles, smallpox and so on.  It's a brazen lie, of course, but the hoot is, the Post never actually *said* that, just implied it.  And if you drew the conclusion they intended...you've been sold.  Again.]

That propaganda has also found its way into many reaches of American life. It has boosted political campaigns.

[What political figure does the Post claim got a "boost" from opposition to the mRNA vax?  Any idea?  We don't know either, but it's a good bet that 90% of Post readers will think *Donald Trump.*  This is odd because Trump has always urged that people who want to take the mRNA vax do so.  But by not explicitly linking the claim ("has boosted political campaigns") to a person, most post readers unconsciously make the link.  And again....]

What was once an overwhelming public consensus on vaccine safety is now a new front in the nation’s culture wars. It is no accident that some in the anti-vaccine movement are equating Sunday’s rally to the annual anti-abortion rally that took place in Washington on Friday.

[Ah!  Another way to discredit anyone critical of duh vax is to link 'em with anti-abortion people.  Cuz liberals link that group with wackos.  But of course no need to say "Anyone critical of the mRNA vax mandates is crazy" when the smooth linkage does it automatically for most people, eh?]

“Our worst worries have been manifested,” said Joe Smyser, chief executive of the Public Good Projects, a nonprofit group that tracks and seeks to combat vaccine misinformation.

[This is another classic: Because the Post said Joe's group combats "vaccine misinformation," it doesn't occur to readers to ask "Who decides what information is accurate and what's considered "misinformation"?  You just assume that anything his group opposes or tries to discredit must be...you guessed it: "misinformation."]

Vaccine skeptics notched another victory just last week, when the U.S. Supreme Court blocked President Biden’s vaccination requirement for large employers. (A smaller mandate for workers at health-care facilities that get federal funding was left intact.)

Despite signs from the earliest days of the pandemic that the anti-vaccine movement was advancing its cause by preying on the uncertainty and social division that accompanied the virus, the U.S. public health establishment never mounted a true counteroffensive...

[REALLY?  That's utter horseshit.  Every single day the Mainstream Media blasted us with Fauxi and Walensky bleating "You MUST take this superbly effective, totally safe vaccine, citizens!"  How many times have you seen the phrase "safe and effective," eh?  But neither word is true:  It's risky as hell, and it doesn't prevent ANY vaxxed person from catching the virus.  
   And note the use of the psychologically-loaded phrase "preying on..."  That phrase is invariably used to describe child sex traffickers, killers, muggers.  So note how smoothly the unconscious linkage has been made.  And most of you didn't even notice, eh?]

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime anti-vaccine activist who will speak at Sunday’s march, said the widening distrust of vaccines is an outgrowth of people’s firsthand experiences with negative side effects from the coronavirus vaccines. He pointed to the large number of reports of reactions to those vaccines now on file in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a database maintained by the CDC.

More than 750,000 such reports have been filed in the U.S. and its territories. But claims of bad reactions in VAERS have not been independently verified, and anyone can make them.  

[The Post just waved away all the deaths reported to the CDC's own "adverse events" reporting website.  And notice how *effortlessly!*  Did you see how the Post did it?  Sure: they said "claims" of bad reactions "have not been independently verified, and anyone can make them."  So does the Post seriously claim that more than a couple are fictitious?  They don't say--and won't, cuz they don't need to.  All they needed to do was raise the *claim* that it was *possible*, and readers did the rest, unconsciously.]

Controlled studies of the coronavirus vaccines offer a more accurate picture of how they work, and those studies have repeatedly shown that the medicines cause no serious side effects for the overwhelming majority of people who receive them.

[First, "controlled studies" are *constantly* being found to be glaringly flawed, so the Post's claim is a "naked assertion."  Let's see a cite, a link, a named author and university.  They don't bother, cuz the mere *claim* that "studies show" is enough for incurious rubes.  
    Also, how about that howler that "those studies have repeatedly shown that the [vaxxes] cause NO serious side effects for the overwhelming majority of people."  Okay, Post liars: you clearly have access to the CDC database, so tell us: As of the end of last year, with barely a year of jabs done, how many Americans had died?
   The Post didn't bother to include that number, eh?  But they clearly have it, so if this article is supposed to "inform," why not tell us?  Think they don't want you to know?
   Okay, got some paper?  Jot down your guess as to the number on the CDC's *official* VAERS website.  And remember, they CDC doesn't count a death as due to the vax unless it happens more than 14 days after a person gets their second jab, so you can be sure they're seriously undercounting!  I've put the figure at the end of this post.]

Kennedy said the growing number of infections among fully- vaccinated people has also eroded public confidence in what biden claimed was a key selling point for vaccine mandates — that they stop the spread of the virus to vulnerable populations.

Although the vaccines are markedly less effective at stopping infection by the new variant, early evidence shows that they still "confer protection" against hospitalization or death.

[Interestingly low bar there: they "confer protection," eh?  Note how that term is impossible to quantify.  If it cut the death rate from 0.03% to 0.028%, that's certainly "some" protection, eh?  Yay!  Win for duh vax!  Thanks, Joe!  But they can't quantify it, so merely making the claim is enough.]

“I think there’s a lot more skepticism,” Kennedy said. “You have a product that simply does not work as advertised.”

What remains to be seen is whether the movement’s success in sowing fear of the coronavirus vaccines can be translated to a broader public rejection of other forms of inoculation, chiefly the immunization of children against diseases such as measles and diphtheria. Casting doubt on such vaccines and erasing school mandates requiring them were the anti-vaccine movement’s long-standing goals before the emergence of the coronavirus.

[Classic: With very few exceptions, people opposed to forcing the mRNA jab on everyone are NOT against vaccines that actually *work*.  The mRNA vaxxes don't.  But by saying that the protesters are trying to get people to reject "other forms of inoculation," and trying to "erase school mandates requiring them" is simply false.  But you didn't even notice, eh?
   And the hit piece uses two more 'grafs to hammer home the lie:]

Tara C. Smith, a professor, said it's far too early for the [anti-mRNA protesters] to declare victory on those fronts. Arguments that have proved effective against the mRNA vaccines, like questioning their relative novelty and the possibility of long-term side effects, could be less convincing when it comes to *established vaccines that many American adults received decades ago without being harmed.*

[No one except the Post propagandists is making that claim.]

“Is this going to bleed over into other things, like childhood vaccinations? I really don’t know,” Smith said. “And that’s the fear.
It’s truly frightening for the future.”

[Ah yes, "truly frightening for the future."  And fear sells--especially when hammered home 24/7 from all outlets, eh?]

The scientific case for the full range of vaccines recommended by public health authorities in the United States remains as solid as ever. Research has shown that those vaccines — which have all but eliminated diseases that once sickened, debilitated or killed millions every year — to be safe for the vast majority of those who receive them.

[Anything strike you as bogus about that last 'graf?  Sure: Again the Post's writers lump a life-threatening, non-immunizing, non-vaccine together with truly safe, immunizing vaccines, and hope you won't think there's any difference.  Cuz how many hundreds of times have the Media bleated "safe and effective," eh?]

The mRNA coronavirus vaccines have proved to be some of the best ever added to physicians’ arsenal.

[That's a "naked assertion."  And by now you should be getting better at recognizing it!  No medical person has ever made such an extreme, absurd claim-- and wouldn't, unless they were being paid by Fauxi.]

As of October, according to the most recent estimates from the CDC, those who received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines and a booster were 40 times less likely to die of the virus than the unvaccinated.

[Another naked assertion.  Show us an author or a link to a paper that supports you.  Why don't they?]

The CDC on Friday released studies showing that the vaccines continue to provide "robust protection against hospitalization" from the omicron variant, even if they no longer ward off infection as effectively.

["Robust protection against hospitalization," eh?  Another unquantifiable.  Define "robust."  Are you claiming the vax keeps you from going to the hospital?  Keeps you from dying?  That's horseshit, but when they say "robust protection," who knows?  If there's *any* protection, is that "robust"?]

Nevertheless, national surveys show about 1 in 5 U.S. adults remain unvaccinated. Among children ages 5 to 11, who became eligible for the shots in November, fewer than 20 percent are vaccinated.

[And you KNOW the Rulers wanna jab your 5-year-olds.  And they're expecting the FDA to approve a vax for 2-year-olds "soon."  Think they'll suddenly revise their orders and let the 2-year-olds slide 3 more years?  Well, did the airlines kick unmasked 2-year-olds and their parents off commercial flights?  (Answer: they damn well did, and were unnecessarily nazi about it.  Death penalty.)

Republicans were much more likely than Democrats to reject the vaccines — another ominous sign for public health officials, who worry that resistance to inoculation could become a permanent trapping of political identity.

[It's certainly true that more conservatives object to the forced vax, but how is the article improved by including this tidbit?  It's not.  The entire purpose is to demonize the unvaxxed--not only do the Media liars imply that the unvaxxed are the only ones who can transmit the virus, but they're also **Trump voters**!  This is deliberately fanning the flames that will make some moronic mask Karen go off her rocker.  And note that loaded word "ominous."  It's no accident.
   You DID notice that word, right?]

Sunday’s rally in D.C. could be a case study in the amplification of anti-vaccine views by media sources that threaten to drown out more conventional, evidence-based voices.

[Oooh, "evidence-based voices"!  But wait, who decides what "evidence" counts, eh?  Why, the Post, of course.  Which is why they ignored the number of deaths reported on the CDC's VAERS site.
   If you get to ban any evidence that doesn't support your claims, it makes it far easier to look convincing, eh?]

Vax deaths reported to VAERS as of 12/31: 21,382.