Jump to content
The Education Forum

Chris Barnard

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Film, music, writing, non-fiction books, documentaries, sports, history, politics, psychology, fishing, photography & travel.

Recent Profile Visitors

668 profile views

Chris Barnard's Achievements

  1. It was a ‘she’ and yes the Dr tried to get it passed through congress on two separate occasions, the most recent being 2008. It was in interests of vaccine safety and it proposed a direct comparison of data between two groups, those without vaccine and those with. The latter part of your message has got a bit ridiculous. Is it your intention to degrade the conversation because I am not in agreement with you? If so, it might be best to leave it. Here is a question for you; how might you go about proving that to be the case and what parameters would you put in place to ensure its fair study? The way you would prove it was by taking a very large group of unvaccinated and comparing them to vaccinated people. That way you can ensure a fair result. I see you’ve ignored me mentioned the CDC listing autism as a side effect. Was that inconvenient for you? If we’re going to have an honest conversation on this, then you need to respond to me, not just pick and choose what suits your case. I was under the impression we were having an open dialogue, not trying to score points. You can do better than this. I actually read that article when it first was published. It was remarkable the way the Guardian had changed their stance, preceding that we’d got the messaging that it was perfectly safe, now they always knew it was imperfect. The MSM have been suggesting a lot since March 2020. Please show me the empirical data that proves transmission and fatalities are reduced in the vaccinated individuals? I’ll save you looking around, that data doesn’t exist. So, perhaps if you’ve got any sense, you might want to have read the earlier part of the thread first, or have checked for the data instead of trusting suggestion in the Guardian. Right?! It sounds like you don’t believe in the Nuremburg code and the individuals right to body autonomy. That was put in place to protect citizens in the aftermath of the Third Reichs despicable experimentation on Jews and Gyspies in WW2. What I am noticing is that your tone is changing and you are getting irate, slinging round accusations. Could you just calm down and maintain some civility, Jeremy? If you can’t the dialogue breaks down. If there is institutional corruption, which is being alleged here, and I think you can understand that the MSM is only running one side of it, then you’ll only hear one side of it. Do you understand? I think anybody would agree that a mass vaccination program in an emergency is dangerous when you have no mid or long term testing results. Thats very logical. Animal testing was skipped which usually tells us a lot. I’ve amply explained why there are more experts supporting the 9/11 commission, thats very logical also. If you can’t accept it, that’s ok. FYI the majority views are supported by know nothing actors and celebrities too, right? If you can’t take the concept seriously, or see the pressures involved, I can’t make you see them, Jeremy. I can tell you that they are there and that human beings have instincts of self preservation, that actually comes from the subconscious. The smarter the person, the more aware they will be of things that can harm them. You have to be able to put yourself in their shoes and envisage how you’d react. Would you have spoken out? Who would you have spoken to if you’d seen foul play? I’m genuinely interested. I don’t think W wants to talk about it. That might be because of the SEO on the site and google search listings, I have no idea. Where would you expect this Saudi guys situation to be corrected or rectified? I am really interested in that answer also. No, none of it is devastating to the official government account. Because of the voices of its critics are not heard. That’s where we are at, Jeremy. That’s undoubtably a scenario that comes about in any investigation. You have blind alleys and some that take you to credible evidence. Let me ask you, do you think passports of the hijackers could be found in the top surface of the rubble, in tact? I would like a yes or a no. If that’s alright? Even after the plane fuel was hot enough to melt heavy steel in a second or two. Do you think, as the record states, a plane traveling at 536mph (Boeing 757) could make a last minute right angle turn at ground level before striking the east wing of the Pentagon? Yes or a no, please, or can say you don’t know. I look forward to your response. Thanks Chris
  2. That’s essentially the hardest thing for the average person to comprehend, believe or accept, that they’re buying into theatre and their hope rests with a self interested caretaker who is acting out instructions. In Carroll Quigley’s “Tragedy & Hope” he alludes to American politics being a 2 party system giving the people the narrowest differences in policy but, making them feel they are enacting change or that their vote counts. Quigley wasn’t a whistleblower, he was an establishment ivy league guy, he thought he was telling history as it is. Despite his book being successful, he suddenly found the publisher didn’t want to do further print runs and made a series of excuses why they wouldn’t. Of course his words about Cecil Rhodes, Alfred Milner and the Council on Foreign Relations could have been the reason. The book is a very detailed history of the world from 1870 to 1963. The book is far from easy reading but, perhaps very important. I’ll do a thread on it when I have time.
  3. The final fail safe would have been blaming CIA rogues, deluded hateful patriots. The people who gave the nod would have gone to any length to avoid being exposed. I don’t think they ever could be. I should imagine someone from above in the east coast clique, spoke with Dulles and then it was all Dulles word against theirs. Dulles did the same with Angleton or Atlee Phillips. You ‘re insulated against any possible prosecution. Each line of people below involved are not conscious of the layers above. You compartmentalise everything. So, they have nobody to name. Also, what is the cost of talking if caught? Chances are people with families would keep quiet and taken the blame. I don’t know if you’ve read about the creation of the Federal Reserve? A bunch of people went down to the Rockefeller estate on Jekyll Island, Georgia on the 22-11-1910. They all used first names only on a private rail car. With the Vanderbilts, Warburgs, Aldrich, and I forget who else all had a secret meeting about how they could control America’s money supply. Woodrow Wilson fell for it. Now you have people inventing money from thin air and charging us interest on it. Fractional Reserve Banking. I’d imagine there is ample evidence JFK was in the way of their progress and more oriented toward the people, as opposed to his class. Vietnam was the straw that broke the camels back. I should also imagine David + Nelson Rockefeller knew what happened to JFK. Nelson had Allen Dulles as his lawyer. This would only be guesswork, I don’t see any way of proving who said “get rid”. But, I am certain it came from higher authority than the CIA or Military.
  4. Hi William, It makes sense in the context you’re explaining it, but, it wasn’t quite the context I was aiming at and that may have been because the post was a little vague. Let me try to elaborate. Inevitably when any event takes place that can be used for political gain or present a threat of losing political ground for a party, some very astute PR people get together strategise how to either benefit and exploit the event, or to carry out an exercise in damage limitation. Mostly, achieving the desired result isn’t accomplished by being fair or honest, its achieved with spin, embellishment and sensationalism. By making something seem much worse or much better than it was in reality, or better than it was, the public will latch onto that. Its one of the reasons news is almost pure sensationalism and agitation. So, the somewhere in the middle comment from me is referred to the truth being somewhere between two or more known XXXXX. Often who can stretch things the most, might end up in the most advantageous position with the electorate. The voter impression isn’t based on cold hard facts, its based on impressions. Another question I have is whether a supporter of either tribe (party) can think independently on this? There is so much emotional investment each election and we get behind things like its our footy(soccer) or baseball team(cricket), or even worse. I am a foreigner, and I’ve seen myself get absorbed by the UK labour/conservative partisan debates, its easily done. What’s even easier is to fall in line with policies or viewpoints just because your party is pushing them. For example, when Clinton or Obama advocated border security, Dems followed, when Trump advocated that, Dems were appalled. I don’t want to over simplify things, as you have lots of complex issues but, as an outsider, the end result isn’t much different. Looking at say Fox & CNN, you’d think they were talking about two completely opposite things. Of course no news network points out the commonalities or when parties agree, it doesn’t sell or grab attention. I may be in the minority but, I see a lot of pantomime and promises and very little delivery. I think Trump was the result of ‘hope and change’ not happening. As for Trump lying, and counting lies. Have we counted the lies or unfulfilled promises of all Dem & Rep presidents in the past century or so? It seems almost expected to lie as a politician. Whether its Woodrow Wilson, LBJ, tricky Dicky, Clinton, the Bushs etc. Is one lie unacceptable or only many? Is America ready to hold XXXXX in politics accountable? If so, that’s a very good thing, as truth is the best of ideals IMHO. I think the best start would be identifying when your own candidate is lying and hold them accountable. That’s not a ‘he said, she said’, as I don’t support either party, in the past two elections could you have possibly had worse options? We have our own panto this side of the Atlantic Ocean. Huxley talked of the politicians of the future being actors, marketable people who could be coached to appear sincere in the public eye. I wonder how many of you would watch this video and tell me this isn’t reality: HOPIUM https://www.bitchute.com/video/ShD1jwx5mJtY/ Cheers Chris PS anywhere it says ‘XXXXX’ it refers to people not telling the truth, it’s not profanity or a curse.
  5. Another very powerful thing is that the focus is always about who fired the gun and from where (if not Ozzie). As opposed to what were the circumstances that led to him being killed and who was behind it. That serves as a distraction too, it prevents most of us from looking for a bigger picture. Most of us see things in isolation, we have a macro focus on traumatic events and a small proportion are deep analytical thinkers who see patterns easily. I do like the ‘cui bono’ logic espoused by some JFK authors.
  6. Hi Michaleen, I am also a PR guy. To me, the power of the government narrative has always been significantly more powerful than the chaps alleging conspiracy, the government had the natural proclivity of the public to conform on their side. But, those alleging conspiracy were much more compelling and had much more conviction. Hence why, the media deflection changed from lone nut, to a wash of other irrelevance, Mafia, Cuban’s, John Birch, etc etc. Anything but, at the military or CIA. Then it became about discrediting JFK, his achievements, his romantic attachments, his family’s behaviour, all of which made people care less about their slain leader. I think this was built into the strategy, layers of blame which took the heat off the actual planners or perpetrators. The truth was lost to the public in that sea of irrelevance and was powerful enough to create self doubt, too many options. An impartial media could have made a mockery of the magic bullet and opened everyones eyes, instead they pushed Arlene Spector and theoretical physics which was a fantasy. The CIA would have been very well versed by 1963 in psychological warfare, with sophisticated propaganda campaigns to mislead the public before and after their regime change operations abroad. Just my thoughts anyway. Thanks for sharing this. Cheers Chris
  7. I do think Ben’s views are quite important. Given how partisan the public discourse is, and that the truth often lies somewhere between two extremes, I welcome opposing views, which make for a healthy discourse in a free and open society. It helps us look at things from an opposing perspective and question our own views, which often aren’t derived from own critical thinking but, from powerful media direction in this day and age. There is nothing too metaphysical, abstruse or esoteric about what Ben is saying. All we can do is seek truth, and that can’t be found by searching out material that suits our own confirmation bias or patting each other on the back for sharing the same views. We have much more in common than what makes us different. We should also maintain our high values regardless of which political party or affiliation is in question or at fault. Of course this is easier said than done, as we are all human and imperfect. Whatever the true answer is here, lets hope it is found and not whitewashed. Lets hope the result isn’t that the place we occupy isn’t less free as a result of the enquiry.
  8. Do we really even need freedom? What could possibly go wrong without it?! A compelling monologue about where we are right now. One for you @Paul Brancato “But now I see that merely to live is not enough, not nearly. A caged bird is alive, but without the freedom to fly in the limitless sky it is denied everything that makes it a bird in the first place. To be alive is not enough. What matters is to live in freedom. A bird is such a fragile creature. It is really all and only about movement. Take away a bird’s movement and it is a handful of feathers and air.Freedom is not negotiable. You are either free, or you are not. Freedom is not even safe. Those who have been imprisoned are often terrified of freedom – all those choices, all of that personal responsibility. This is why ex-cons often re-offend, so they can go back behind bars where it feels safer, out of harm’s way.”
  9. Actors speak out promoting taking an experimental treatment that isn’t solving the problem. We share and clap our heroes. ✅ Actors speak out against taking an experimental treatment. They’re not credible, we silence them. ❌ Virologists, epidemiologists, Dr’s, Scientists speak in favour of taking an experimental treatment for safety reasons, they’re credible. ✅ Virologists, epidemiologists, Dr’s, Scientists speak out against taking an experimental treatment for safety reasons, they’re not credible, we silence them. ❌ Fantastic use of logic guys. FYI confirmation bias is a two way street. It’s always a lot easier to con someone than it is to convince someone they have been conned.
  10. Yes, you got the patriot act, a mass loss of privacy and the the biggest data capture in history began. That term 9/11 became the justification for any overt action anywhere, just as long as the MSM kept it firmly in the public conscious. Of course anyone taking flights could never forget it. TBH, I haven't read too much on it, it looked like protestors breaking into a government building. I did a little refresher as to when thats happened before in the USA, which was interesting. It looked like a rabble of the disenfranchised. Knowing America's past, it would not surprise me if plain close cops or FBI were in the mix. If we're holding down and outs for 6 months in solitary for breaking and entering or disorderly conduct, how far are we off Maoist China or the Soviet Union? What do genuine subversives get, waterboarding at GTMO? Oh wait, America already did that. 🙂 Its not even funny ... But, actually 9/11 made that acceptable, most of us heard about torture and didn't think it was the type of thing a despotic regime does, we thought it was necessary after 9/11. Thats the power of media. I've been thinking about this a lot lately. He was expected to be the corruptible establishment guy, who would use power to further his and his family wealth. I bet the first person who went to call a favour from JFK, left thinking "this isn't how its supposed to work". They got a shock, they assumed he wouldn't betray his class. The more I read, the more I think the person who have the nod to kill JFK had a surname name starting with R .... I tend to take Carroll Quigley's work as credible, he had no motive to invent, he was a serious historian and lecturer at Harvard, Georgetown and Brown. Bill Clinton's mentor too. It's another incremental step toward something Huxley & Orwell forecasted in different ways.
  11. So, you believe they melted the steel and thats how it collapsed?! Ok cool. How did those passports avoid damage? No but, you disregarded my comment about technology. You usually have to wait 10-15 years to hear what the Pentagon has come up with. Neither of us know how, there are plenty of ways to skin a cat. Ozzie could have got further back in the room and still found an angle for an easy shot, Day of the Jackal style. Like you, I don't believe he fired a shot. Where did I mentioned steel joists being cut? What about the very qualified people who say 'inside job' ? How do you decide which qualified people to listen to? Do you do it on volume? Have a count up? I thought I addressed this above but, i'll go again. Where is the incentive? What is your motivation for speaking up? Truth? Some very truthful people have but, the majority of people would have had the sense and self preservation not to challenge the government on this, not to commit social suicide in their friendship circle, and not to jeopardise their future opportunity of work. Imagine your name blasted across the papers and internet, attached to being a conspiracy theorist. Would you speak up? Or would you say, i'll just keep my views to myself? The answer is obvious, unless you are very courageous and probably an idealist. Thats a very tiny percentile of the population. I don't know what W's views are but, it's funny the way you phrase that. The guy in Saudi who claimed his identity was used was never involved. I don't know if they were remotely piloted, I know the tech was newly available. I am open minded. You like that word 'unlikely' but, the notion that the government, the CIA or FBI were involved in a plot to kill JFK sounds very unlikely if you've just read a few news articles and listened to Walter Cronkite on TV, you'd find it very acceptable that Ozzie did it. Right? I have never spoken to @W. Niederhut about 9/11, i should imagine he'll reply if he indeed sees any merit. It's the same with this, only one needs proving to collapse the 9/11 commission, the whole thing doesn't need explaining. You seem not to have addressed some of my points, like Flight 77 and the Pentagon and the cellular phone calls. Would you care to in the spirit of this back and forth? The trouble with consciences is that we have mathematics and probability. If they keep happening, you know something is up. Unless you're the kind of guy that goes in the strip club and thinks the stripper fancies you?! 🙂 It's like the 100 or so people in Belzer's book that died in the aftermath of the JFKA. We could say pure coincidences but, what were the odds? 133 trillion to one or something crazy. The biggest attack on US soil since Pear Harbour and the busiest day in US aviation history due to the air force being up in terror drills, simulating hijackings. Seems a bit fishy. I am sure there are some bits and bobs in this that can be disregarded. I think there are some that can't. There are some magic bullets. I can certainly get digging into this, I last looked in 2016 or 17. It's every bit as fascinating as the JFKA.
  12. That’s actually false. A very well meaning Dr has tried to put this through congress twice and its been rejected. I mean having unvaxxed vs vaxxed study groups to determine causality. The data produced regarding that claim regarding MMR, and autism didn’t prove the vaccine doesn’t cause autism but, it was used as deflection. I think it focussed on Thimericol or somethijt similarly named which is mercury based. The CDC website says in bold lettering, vaccines do not cause autism. But the disclaimer pamphlet with the vaccine lists autism as a potential side effect. The reason that is in there is so that the company making the shot can’t be sued. Why would they need to pop that in the disclaimer? It’s almost like you are completely unaware that people who have had both shots are catching the virus, spreading the virus and are dying of the virus. If the stuff coming out this week regarding Pfizer is 100% accurate, people are more susceptible to the virus as the vaccines effectiveness is waning. It lasts 6 months. I’d imagine this reply is a bit of an eye opener.
  13. After the first read of Stephen’s comment I was going to agree with him and then it suddenly occurred to me that it can mean two different things and i’d likely interpreted it differently to the way it was actually intended. “A distraction to reveal a more diabolical process.” “ a Trojan Horse that was propped up and pushed into play by oligarchs and fascists who used him to put policies and players into position that would further consolidate their power.” Despite the potential of a coup being a fantasy IMHO (for reasons cited earlier ij the thread). The idea of it being used as a distraction and there being a more diabolical process behind that seems possible and, there is a consolidation of power. The psychological impact of that day seems massive, just amongst forum members here, they mostly think democracy almost fell and was lost. The impact of that will be the state cracking down on, profiling, surveilling, censoring and criminalising people who express dissent, and plan or carry out protests. This will be the reason. They are domestic terrorists now. In the world of ‘thought crimes’, where is this going to take us? Sounds like power is and will be consolidated, the state vs the people.
  14. Thank you for all of your hard work and endeavours. I am certain the majority of us would be willing to contribute, so that maintenance costs are covered. We’d hate to see this tremendous resource disappear. Best wishes, Chris
  15. Just as you pointed out above that you don’t necessarily automatically believe everything you read from anti-vaxxers. I don’t either, I like to read, 1-2 books per week and listen to podcasts. I also don’t automatically believe everything I hear from government. Another belief is that intelligent human beings have the capacity to grasp and understand fields of study outside of their usual domain of expertise. Is it conceivable to you that government could be used as a mechanism for private corporations to profit? If so, what would be the circumstances and conditions required for that to happen? Are you conscious of how philanthropic, charitable foundations operate and are used in America and globally? ie The Rockefeller Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation etc Are you aware that there are two companies in the world that have a monopoly in every major industry? If so, do you understand what kind of a culture that creates, as well as the to people & democracy? I can share something with you, I felt just like this, thats these purple and green haired types screaming at the tops of their voices at authority about vaccines must be maladjusted, uneducated or resentful. MSM originally created that perception in my mind. However, when this crisis started, I not only read about the history of vaccines, and the times we’ve screwed up with their safety but, I also had time to look at the Autism argument. I went into this on the fence, after doing some reading from the CDC site and those against the CDC, I came to a rather interesting finding. The finding was that most of these people trying to fight the CDC on the MMR vaccine and allege it causes autism, aren’t actually anti-vaxxers. Most of them are pro-vaccine safety. The next question you have is; why is the media portraying them as something they are not? The argument of those alleging some vaccine or a vaccine is causing autism is very simple. All they are asking is that the government releases the data (which should be owned by the tax payer). You see around 30% of Americans haven’t had the shots in question and around 70% had. They say, show us the date and it either kills or vindicates our argument. To me that seems a very fair request, given the tax payer funded it. And it puts the situation to bed. But, the government will not release the data. What are your conclusions? with 50% of Americans with serious underlying health conditions from childhood, is it just diet and environment thats causing it. Any idea why we have just 5 or 6 shots in the UK to give us immunities and you guys in the USA are having 69 shots or something like that now? I have probably had 10 shots, allowing for ones that covered me in the far east, middle east and south/central America. Americans are having a lot. Robert F Kennedy Jr has written and talked about this plenty, he understands the crux of the issue perfectly. It’s easy enough to find outside of MSM. In regard to the CDC & the WHO, as you can probably tell, Dennis and I are accusing them. So to accept their figures, which I have pointed out earlier in this thread are disingenuous, would be like us having the local fox running the enquiry into why 3 hens are missing from the hen house. It’s entirely antithetical. Or having the probable conspirators in the JFKA, being the architects of the investigation of his murder. I am sure the FBI and CIA were very useful. As I say, its antithetical. I 100% believe what I am saying, my expertise isn’t in virology. It’s in public relations and that really was why in late March 2020, I began to question what we were being fed, as the techniques used were straight out of the handbook. It doesn’t surprise me that people wouldn’t understand this, as most people are completely unaware that they are being sold products, there is zero difference between selling ideas and products, the principles and psychological techniques are the same. Cary Mullis - Inventor or the PCR test stated that his test is not to be used to detect viruses, as it’s wholly inaccurate for that and produced false positives. Is this one of the experts you prefer to listen to or ignore? Dr Robert Malone, inventor or the MRNA technology is telling is the MRNA vaccines are dangerous and should be pulled. He has been speaking out from the start. I don’t know how many DR’s, MD’s, PHD’s or virologists need to speak to be taken seriously. There are plenty of them, but, they’re being censored or ignored via MSM. To have a balanced argument, we need to look at all sides to make an informed decision. You don’t achieve that with censorship. Or propaganda. We’d like to know too, but, at present hospitals are telling us the vaccines are perfectly safe, however, the reporting is done via a ‘self reporting system’. How do you report your own death? Harvard conducted a study in 2016 on this self reporting vaccine system and decided that whatever the reported deaths or side effects caused by a vaccine, that this amount would actually be to the power of 10. So, just like in my earlier reply, this needs recording properly so that the public can have accurate date and make an informed decision. 5000 vaccine deaths were reported a month or so ago, as an expected consequence of using an experimental treatment, that skipped animal testing and only has emergency permissions granted. If you’re taking the Harvard study seriously, then the actual amount might be 50k deaths, which suddenly is a noticeable figure, namely because that means it killed more people than actual Covid during the same period. Which may or may not concern you. In short, the data is not fit for purpose and outrageously the news networks who have told us for months that the vaccines are perfectly safe, bow have the audacity to turn around and say that we always knew the vaccines would be imperfect, as they were produced in an emergency scenario. Great. Thanks Chris
  • Create New...