We have some interesting information coming out from a couple of whistleblowers

that blew the whistle and reported the coercive nonsense that's been going on

at Facebook. Project Veritas broke this story very recently showing that

Facebook has been censoring, filtering our discussions and they've been

really trying to crush any and all debate about the science of vaccinations.

Take a look at this video. If I read this correctly, Facebook is saying it

doesn't matter if the story is true so long as it doesn't cause people to

hesitate getting the vaccine. What's your read on this?

The borderline vaccine framework, shopping stories, potentially or actually

be true, events or facts that can raise safety concerns.

That post was done by a user and they've taken a screenshot and observed

it in a sort of tear system. What about this gives them alarm?

How is this not scary? That would be considered indirect discouragement.

Indirect discouragement, which should be considered tear too.

This is an example of indirect discouragement of the vaccine.

Crescent to that same question and anything involved in the vaccine.

This was then demoted on Facebook. So this is another example of tear

too indirect discouragement. Why don't you tell us why this would be indirect

discouragement according to Facebook?

This makes your back in hesitant because they don't want people to see

someone had a bad effect. They're not saying don't get the vaccine but they're saying

look at all this negative stuff that happened after they got the vaccine.

...