Is vaccination violence? If X/Twitter has its way, obviously it has. A user who was seriously injured by vaccination asked Health Minister Carl Lauterbach in a tweet to vaccinate himself with experimental gene therapy drugs so he would realize what they have done to people injured by vaccination. Twitter responded by suspending the account on the grounds that one should not threaten, glorify, incite, or express a desire for harm or violence. Do official vaccination recommendations also pose a risk of violence?
The user is legally represented by lawyer Tobias Ulbrich, who is fighting for the rights of many vaccine victims in Germany. On September 2, Ulbricht reported on X about autoimmune skin diseases after corona vaccination, which many of his clients also suffer from. The lawyer described the suffering of those affected as, “Every movement is painful horror.”
It is very understandable when one of these affected people reacts extremely indignantly to the complete ignorance of the harms of vaccination on the part of Germany’s (un)Health Minister Carl Lauterbach and blames him for repeatedly requesting vaccination. Is. A user and customer of Ulbricht was affected by the following tweet addressed to Lauterbach:
“Get the crap out of you. It would be best to tell you what harm vaccination causes. And you realize what you have done to the people affected by the vaccine. Shame on yourself”
X reacted immediately – and blocked the person. Apparently the request for multiple injections of the vaunted Corona gene therapy drugs glorifies violence. An acknowledgment that it has finally been realized here that mass vaccination with large-scale mandatory vaccination represents a crime? The impression may be clear. Attorney Ulbricht discussed the case as follows (emphasis added by editor):
Our client asked me to inform everyone online that he has been blocked from Twitter today by #censorship. On the occasion of my reporting today on #skin-related #damage as a result of so-called #vaccination, which also causes considerable damage to our client, as confirmed by a doctor, as is easily seen from his photographs, which I have access to Was asked to post on his behalf, Today our client was shocked that thousands of other people are sharers in his fate and it seems that he has to fight the windmills alone. As the injured party, he wrote correctly from his point of view. You can find out the reason for the closure at the bottom left of the picture next to the photos.
Since Mr. @Karl_Lauterbach wrote that the vaccination was “free of side effects” and repeated this with Anne Will, it is generally denied that our client’s post included a request for multiple vaccinations, which Mr. Lauterbach must complete. May violate Twitter/X guidelines. When the recommendation still works today and the customer does nothing more than recommend the vaccination to @Karl_Lauterbach several times so he can see how free of side effects it really is. It is just resuming its autumn vaccination campaign.
Lauterbach’s desire to be vaccinated multiple times with real vaccines amounts to glorification of violence. With this, Twitter declared that vaccinating is “violence”. Is this what the censors seriously want to portray? The fact that our customers used the derogatory synonym “plore” instead of vaccination, which is often used by injured people, does not make the repetition of the ministry’s recommendation to vaccinate oneself multiple times a glorification of violence. Otherwise, the Federal Health Ministry would logically be accused of glorifying violence through Twitter by recommending vaccination.
We demand that the account of our customer @JörgNannen be activated immediately. If a victim is not allowed to be angry at the widespread reporting about his or her fate and the realization that thousands of people share his or her fate, this country and Twitter may soon say goodbye. This should be covered by Article 5 of the Basic Law, such that the Minister was allowed to make a misleading claim, contrary to Article 8 of the AMG, that the substance was “free from side effects”. It is monstrous to prevent people who have been vaccinated and who are now seriously injured from speaking because of such statements by the Minister.
Lawyer T. Ulbricht
On the morning of September 3, the user’s account was unblocked again – but the assessment of vaccination as “violence” is likely to remain with users who followed the case. If calling for multiple vaccinations is “violence”, then what have governments around the world done to their citizens?
