FORCED VACCINATION

Let's exercise some mathlogic and cybersecurity.
Here is a conjecture: when they mandate vaccination this alleged vaccine is no longer vaccine.
We are not talking here about your constitutional rights, which you had lost long ago anyways,
nor we are talking about police brutality, nor FDA approval, proper testing and safety -- nothing that normally concerns people.
We are talking here about the CORRESPONDENCE between the actual chemical composition of the liquid in the syringe
and the DECLARED chemical composition of this substance. Ok, ok, it is not "actual" and it is not "the syringe" because it is all in the future yet,
but I hope you are imagining the scene in the present. Right?

Wait a second! The aforementioned mandate results in force being applied to you, how could it possibly affect in any manner the chemical composition of any vaccine?
What a sick mind could link these in such a conjecture?

The point is whenever force comes into play the perpetrators no longer bound to make truthful claims.
The force itself makes ANY claims about the injected substance INSIGNIFICANT.
Because they will inject it REGARDLESS of the chemical composition.
Thus for all intents and purposes of your personal security the substance is not what they claim it to be.
From a mathematical perspective a claim that it is vaccine and the reality that it is potentially ANYTHING are not equivalent, anything and vaccine are DIFFERENT THINGS.

From a security perspective the picture is more detailed but the conclusion is the same.
In the situation of incomplete information your security strategy stands on a corpus of ASSUMPTIONS,
they can not be judged as true/false, but they can be foolish or smart.
It makes no practical difference for you at what point and how physically the substance in the syringe stopped being the claimed vaccine,
if it at some point was replaced, or the vaccine never existed -- either way your smartest assumption is "it is harmful".
And the motives of any people involved in the process (people totally unknown to you, I mind you!) make no difference either --
they knew the force will be applied, they knew the substance will end up into your body, be it ANY substance.
But it is already the game theory territory, and we must not digress.
  
Many people tempted to oversimplify the explained approach to: "What is unknown must be assumed harmful".
But it is not sufficiently accurate, the best rule of thumb would be: "What is forced upon you must be assumed harmful."
And I am about to prove it completely.

Imagine you go to a friendly doctor to take a well known perfectly safe medicine.
Do you know what is in the syringe?
DO YOU KNOW?!

The correct answer is: NO.
You do not know what is the syringe, you physically lack any means to know that!

Do you believe the medicine is what the doctor claims it to be?
Yes, you do BELIEVE. Why? Because you trust this particular doctor.
The origin of trust could vary from friendship to contract but it always boils down to the COST of lying: if this doctor kills you, he loses a friend -- it is HIS LOSS, or he loses a paying customer -- it is HIS LOSS, or he ended up in jail with multimillion fines and compensations for you -- it is HIS LOSS.
What is the cost of lying for a forced-vaccination agent? ZERO! He is paid to inject something in you regardless of the outcomes.
You die of it, he does not care, you become sterile, he does not care.
The only cost he pays is the risk of violent resistance on your part, but he has all the govt violence on his side already.

This problem of trust recurs to the doctor himself, from whom had he obtained the medicine, from a trusted source, applying same logic.
Well implicitly applying it, because we evolved automatism in such social questions.
And it recurs step-by-step until the very source of the chemicals.
On each step the significance of each individual trusting customer slightly lowers because the body of "paying customers" gets larger, however, the means of verification grow larger, and therefore the risk of being verified by a larger body of professional customers gets higher for larger suppliers.

Thus A CHAIN OF TRUST is created! Where each link is more interested in satisfying their customers rather than poisoning them.
But it all started with you going to a friendly doctor of your choice.
This chain recursively translates your interest through to the raw chemicals producers.
And yes, it magnifies errors, at each step the distrust is multiplied by the next step etc -- so it is VITAL to chose the most friendly doctor to begin with, who will chose his most friendly pharma supplier etc.
The very moment you lose your ability to chose the doctor, you lose all the confidence in the actual chemical composition of the alleged "vaccine".

Thus the force applied to you destroys the chain of trust that is THE ONLY source of real true vaccine, therefore it is NOT even vaccine, it is some perfectly UNKNOWN substance.