Democracy · Politics · Scamdemic

The SCOTUS Abortion Ruling and Vaxx-Induced Infertility

I made some rather curious observations recently. First, when there is a big legal debate behind the scenes, there is normally a lot of fake debate in the mainstream media. The right to bear arms is one example. This is a constant topic in US mainstream media. Yet, the very recent turn of events in the US abortion debate is quite different. Out of nowhere there was a leak suggesting that the SCOTUS may rule that there is no constitutional right to an abortion. A few weeks later, this was indeed what happened. We got a few twerking fatties staging a protest, and some women who have not seen a dick in years went on a “sex strike” in order to make all the imaginary men who do not fuck them do something.

The observation above may be humorous, but then something else happened: I forgot to take my schizo meds for a few days, which makes me notice all kinds of weird connections. Or perhaps you did not take your schizo meds, so mine stopped working, just like it is with the vaxx. Anyway, walk with me for a while and let us see where we end up.

First, there have been a lot of stories about people not just dying from the vaxx but also of the effect of the vaxx on fertility. Of course, this was dismissed as pure coincidence, which is a line that has been used so much that the vaxx is affectionately referred to as the leading cause of coincidences. However, this narrative collapses when you get official numbers stating that there is a drop in new borns by 10 to 20%, some kind of nine-sigma event. We are talking about an outcome that is even less likely to be due to chance than, for instance, the top 100 governmental officials in a German city of 100,000 all being Albanians with a German passport.

Second, knowledge of a decline in births has been known by government agencies well in advance. They all knew that this is coming! Your government may release such data only once a year, but their data collection happens all throughout the year. This provides them with a lot of time to react unfortunate statistics that could make people notice things.

Third, if it is true that the vaxx is used for carrying out industrialized genocide, then the number of people around will decline. Nobody will really notice if some octogenarians who may have had it in them to live to 95 dies at 83. Likewise, if a Western woman who is 35 and tries hard to conceive turns out to be unable to, normies would probably not blame the vaxx right away. Those stories are all just anecdotes, after all. Also, the elites have a solid twenty to thirty years to come up with an explanation why someone who got jabbed at the age of 5 in 2022 is not able to father children in 2052. However, one big issue is that the number of babies being born, or not being born, is measurable. We now know that this is happening, and the change was sudden and unexpected, at least for jabbed sheep. Schizos had a hunch that this was coming.

Looking at this evidence, the thought occurred to me whether it is possible that SCOTUS ruled against a constitutional right to murdering your unborn children because doing so will invariably increase the number of children being born. A plausible scenario is that Biden’s handlers realized in the summer of 2021 that they will have a problem on their hand. At that point, stories were coming out about pregnant women losing their babies after getting vaxxed, which was, of course, just a coincidence. This was not supposed to happen. The vaxx was supposed to kill people slowly and only cause a collapse of the white population in 20 to 30 years when today’s children turn will be adults. Yet, not only are people keeling over at staggering numbers, fertility of today’s adult females has been hit a lot harder than planned. Thus, the genocidal impact of the vaxx is there to see. It is right in the data!

With the SCOTUS ruling, abortions will be more difficult to come by, and women will have more children. This will hide that a part of society has been rendered infertile with the vaxx. We will have to see what the actual numbers will be. Also, this is likely only a short-term effect, leading some women who cannot control their sexual urges and who cannot find a “professional” to chop up the defenseless little human in their womb to have kids earlier. They likely will not have more children, or significantly more children, over their lifetime.

I also want to address the uber-autistic response that it does not make sense that the vaxx, on the one hand, sterilizes people, but on the other, leaves enough fertile women around so that we will have an uptick in the number of babies born if we ban abortions. Of course, this retard-level thinking can be rebuked quite easily as we are talking about different demographics. The vaxx has been promoted primarily to whites who furthermore are, in raw numbers, not the primary customers of Moloch’s “Abort U” drive-through fetus-sacrifice centers. Thus, you get fewer babies of one race and more of another, and this is perfectly aligned with this schizo theory of the Great Replacement. Is this not a completely crazy coincidence?

Phew! This was quite a trip. While writing this, my heart rate jumped up and it is still elevated. Thankfully, nothing like this could ever have happened in reality. Now that I have taken an extra dose of my schizo meds, I can conclude that it is absolutely impossible that there is any level of coordination in the US government, or that governments would want to artificially inflate the numbers of births in the short term to hide the inexplicable drop in births for a few years, buying them time to figure out their next move. This would be utter insanity because we all know who wise and benevolent our rulers are. They would never screw you over.

10 thoughts on “The SCOTUS Abortion Ruling and Vaxx-Induced Infertility

  1. This is a great example of viable speculation! It hadn’t occured to me to connect those two aspects. So let’s see how this is going to play out!
    My gues is that, even if undeniable proof for such evil scheming gets widely disseminated and discussed, for the West it probably won’t change that much. Because one main purpose of toxic Western culture fter all is the creation of collective apathy and neglect due to massive and constant demoralization. This is trance-induced apathy even in the very face of a tangible threat. So a sizeable part of Western populations will most likely simply fizzle out, no matter whether they are going to be continuously supplied with porn, netflix and junk food or not…

  2. Here is a blog post that collects a few statistics of rapidly declining births, focusing on Western countries:
    https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/dramatic-decrease-in-births-in-germany

    EDIT: The author also has a follow-up article about Taiwan’s 23% drop of births:
    https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/depopulation-of-taiwan

    Remember, guys, none of this has anything to do with the vaxx, and if a drop of births is a problem, we only have to bring in shiploads of third-worlders to fill the gap.

  3. In light of such statistics and knowing what our technocratic neo-gnostic elites are keen on bringing about (their “paradise on earth”) my informsd guess would be that, since in the future, all vaccinations are to be mRNA gene injections, such numerous gene treatments are intended to increasingly prevent natural human reproduction and development in the womb. The very soon infertile (i.eincapable of reproduction) “last generation” is marching under the rainbow banner and is allowed to hedonistically change their sex weekly, but only if their vaccination status is genuine.

    From thereon human reproduction happens in the gene lab and in the test tube to order, as outlined by gay d***bag (((Yuval Noah Harari))), e. g. as outline in his recent pamphlet “Homo Deus” (the very title pure blasphemy). The perfect world paradise of neo-feudalistic slave owners, all under total control…

    What I find particalarly striking is the fact that this has been foreshadowed to the T by Aldous Huxley in his “Brave New World”, in the scene where world leader oligarch Mustafa (!) Armand describes the laboratory process of human reproduction and the mechanism of “child rearing”, i. e. all the forms of trauma-based mental programming (very much akin to what Plato had in mind for the model of the perfect state in his “Politeia”) to create perfect obedience towards the state.

    The Huxley brothers Julien and Aldous were very much involved not only in drug experiments (psychonauts) but also in globalist technocratic circles and think-tanks of their time, so it doesn’t strike me as odd that they knew a thing or two about the “great work of the ages” and the “externalization of the hierarchy”…

  4. Nothing would surprise me at this point, of course. But I think it’s perfectly plausible that the SCOTUS ruling is an independent and undesireable (for the US elites) outcome. After all, with every state having its own abortion laws, and most negros having probably gravitated from the “racist” and more conservative South to Commiefornia, New Yuck and the other coastal liberal areas (I’m just guessing, haven’t checked demographic stats), the number of aborted black babies won’t see a significant drop.

    1. That’s right. This ruling doesn’t amount to much. California and New York will continue to crank out abortions. The minority of states that outlaw it will just see irresponsible sluts take an out of state trip. There are already corporate sponsors for this. They do like them some abortion.

    2. Perhaps you are overestimating the extent to which irresponsible and middle-to-lower class skanks will be able to cross (sometimes several) state lines in order to have an abortion. After all, who knows how long the current gas crisis will last, and big virtue-signaling corporations simply can’t employ and sponsor abortion tours for most of them.

      In general terms though, we are in agreement.

    3. I agree that the vaxx is the most likely culprit in lower birth numbers. I have suspected as much ever since the early leaked biodistribution data strongly suggested it accumulates in ovaries and bone marrow.

      Add to this an apparent rise in miscarriages and the recently revealed effects on male fertility, and we got a large impact. I seriously wonder whether this will be a one-off effect, or a more permanent one.

      On the other hand, I do not think there will be much of an effect in the total number of abortions, SCOTUS has not prohibited abortions, they basically said its not in the constitution, so it is for the individual states to decide. It goes in line with other recent changes in juridprudence, which are all consistent with a newly conservative judiciary starting to roll back what they see as decades of judicial activism from the leftm

      Deep red states already had few abortion clinics in them, I suspect most of the blue states will keep it legal and widely available. Also, wherever it gets prohibited, expect a black market in abortion pills to emerge. Dont get me wrong, I am 100% against abortion and would like to see it outlawed, but lets not overstate the likely effects of this ruling.

  5. What happened to you over the last few years? With all this conspiracy bullshit lol. And where did you get your numbers from?

    SCOUTS ruling changed nothing and it was anticipated for decades because the original ruling was bs. You can still go to colorado and abord a 9-month (!!!) old fetus. And black women always had and probably always will have higher abortion rates lol.

    You even have some famous black activists that want to stop abortion completely, because they fear that the black people will die out otherwise.

    1. Donald, did you spend the last few years on a mountain? Your “conspiracy theorist” charge is nothing but laughable. Just go back half a year or a year and look at mainstream stories. Perhaps start with the phrase, “safe and effective”. Make sure you also refresh your memory on the positions the mainstream vilified. Then, look around you. On more or less any mainstream position, you are better off believing the opposite.

      By the way, if the SCOTUS ruling is so inconsequential, why is the left so upset about it? Furthermore, if you are correct, then why was the original Roe v. Wade ever important at all? Quite frankly, do you spend even five seconds thinking about what you are going to write or do you just give your inner NPC free rein?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.