It would be racist NOT to push Blacks to the front of the line for the coming "vaccine" which has just been approved without safety testing at Warp Speed. This according to CNN's Tina Sacks, who identifies as a Black Female with a specialty in racial health inequity. She says Black people's distrust of the medical system is warranted, given past abuses, and they should be prioritized for the upcoming vaccine rollout.
The Virus - and Government Response - are Racist
Sacks begins by reminding the reader Blacks are hesitant to line up for the injection because they remember the Tuskegee syphilis study of the 1930s, in which Black men were told their syphilis would be treated (but it was not). The study was meant "to test the repulsive idea that Black people are biologically different than White people". She says today "Black people are being turned away at emergency departments, sent home without having been examined or treated and later dying of the virus... living with, and dying of, racism".
She concludes, "we live in a country organized around structural racism."
The Solution: Inject Blacks First
Leaving Blacks untreated (as was done in the Tuskegee study) is cruel and racist, says Sacks, so prioritizing them to receive the Pfizer vaccine before other groups is the only remedy. Vulnerable people with one or more of following labels should be jabbed first:
- prisoners
- immigrants
- crippled/disabled
- Indigenous
- Blacks
(Should someone check with Earth's indigenous peoples - which comprises a huge variety of ethnicity, cultures, and belief systems - to see if they're okay being made into professional victims? Perhaps they don't want to be jabbed by the government, in an effort to signal how racist it isn't? Something tells me many are distrusting of the White man's needles.)
For more information on this untested technology, please see my posts Experimental Vaccine? You Go First, I'll Wait and See!, and CNN Begs for Heavier Vaccine Censorship.
The Assumption
The assumption Ms. Sack is relying upon is that the vaccine is safe, that it's a good idea, and that in the course of time we won't look back upon it like another 1976 Swine Flu vaccine disaster, where many more were harmed and killed by the vaccine than by the virus. Those are mighty big assumptions.
Indeed, the jury is still out on that one. Over in South Africa, leaders are furious that Black people have been used as guinea pigs for testing the upcoming vaccines, which have been deemed an "experimental Satanic agenda".
So, is it racist to push Blacks to the front of the line? Or is it racist NOT to?
Perhaps we don't yet fully know the answer, and to rush to either conclusion would be risky at best, monumentally disastrous for humanity at worst.
"Although distrust is warranted, we Blacks suffer more from not getting access to life-saving treatments than being injected with nefarious vaccines." Is that just hyperbole? If she can back that up, Sacks has a point. I'd like to see her sources and calculations.
Bottom Line
The vaccines need proper testing, which means years of safety and efficacy trials. Forcing brand new mRNA technology on any one demographic of society, essentially as a test, could be a FAR bigger harm than proceeding with due caution.
But that's just my opinion, and I'm not a Black Female or CNN writer, so please take it with a grain of salt and do your own research.
DRutter
