Jump to content
The Education Forum

The inevitable end result of our last 56 years


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

First Fox News tried to blame "Antifa" for the January 6th Trump "Stop the Steal" mob attack on Congress.

Then they tried to blame the "Deep State."

Now we finally get to read their January 6th text messages... 🤥

Pic of the Moment

It looks like our Fox News fan, Ben, has derailed any discussion of Fox's historic January 6th chicanery into yet another debate about COVID vaccines.

Meanwhile, Fox has been aggressively attacking the January 6th investigation.  MAGA...

https://www.axios.com/fox-news-mark-meadows-january-6-8dbdb0c8-cc88-41f0-9ce6-0b65aa9d0769.html

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 16.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Douglas Caddy

    1890

  • Benjamin Cole

    1808

  • W. Niederhut

    1551

  • Steve Thomas

    1522

Yes John, I'm not worried, but of course I'm vaccinated. If you're not vaccinated and unworried, it's not really about whether you're worried or not, you could pass it on to similar unworried people.

But we are beyond the extreme lock down phase. I think the evidence is this is more contagious but ultimately weaker. But for example, Things could get weird for the rest of the Football season with the current NFL rules.

****

Ben: If you start off the COVID-19 story by lying to the public about the origins of the virus...who believes what you have to say next?
Made in Wuhan lab...with funding from the US? Now, that is a story that must be suppressed. The media people who would suppress such a story...would you believe any thing else they have to say? 
 
It would be,  but you haven't proven that at all Ben, just as you haven't proven that the FBI provoked the 1/6 break in to the Capitol, and are looking sillier by the minute for it.IMO  ..I think all of us here were aware of that possibility  before you could come and enlighten us, and I don't recall hearing anybody here doubting that that could be possible. Worth investigating,   But once it's here, so what? What does that have to do with the ongoing struggle of battling a pandemic?
 
The people who propagated that the disease was some "plandemic"used as a means to gain control of other groups were the most full of sh-t of all and have done the greatest disservice to those who are earnestly fighting the disease.
 
Vaccines work! It's true we don't know the long range  effects of some of these rna vaccines. It's true the manufacturers are released from liability. At some point there was a conscious choice made that the 1)public wasn't going to be able to put up with too many restrictions for too long, and 2) the economic damage would be overwhelming so a decision was made to go with our biopharma lobby. That's the way it's done in our style capitalism, big money wins out and the corporate states tentacles are thoroughly ensconsed in government. If a person doesn't want to take the chance of being vaccinated because he will have no legal recourse should he get sick, then any conscientious person must distance himself from outside people, obey all the protocols and their life will be restricted,they will not walk into public places without a mask and in many cases not be able to leave the country.
 
Always lies, lies, right? It's true, there might be other lies, but the only action I can say is an outright lie was telling people at the beginning they didn't have to wear a mask, when the real reason was that there was a mask shortage that was needed for the responders.
Then there's the public confusion because of  patchwork quilt decisions made by consensus in different regions. Execution mistakes, they botched testing early on, etc. Whatever double messages the medical establishment put out it was complicated many more times over by a chief executive who was working at odds with them.
But after that it's simply that they don't know,  and they're making errors in trying to find out.
 
Unfortunately when people finally concede to follow authority, they want to think that authority is infallible and act betrayed when part of the process is just trial and error, and sometimes previous policies were wrong. People didn't know at first that transmissibility is lessened out doors. People didn't know at first it was an airborne disease and everybody was using bleach everywhere and I know I was paranoid touching doorknobs.
You can strike out about the profit motive in a capitalist economy, but outside of that , it's not anything that "ominous deep state". It was a non rehearsed emergency response to a pandemic.IMO
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

This is the tactic - discredit when they speak out. Although Dr Peter McCullough has largely avoided this, despite his advocacy of early treatment. 
We have multiple others in the same boat as Malone. Many who advocate double-blind studies. 
 

Last time I looked there were studies on the CDC website discrediting the efficiency of wearing masks. Dr Fauci’s emails indicate this to he the case. Which makes them a psychological tool. 
 

In contrast in the UK, we have been led to be terrified that hospitals will be overwhelmed and they never have in the vast majority of towns, cities etc. We have an average age of death of Covid in the UK of 82.5 and an average normal life expectancy of 81 of everything else. People would do well to try and understand the context of that. Meanwhile we are turning away cancer patients, to prioritise booster shots. While we are seeing studies from all over the place that assert natural immunity is between 6 and 13 times stronger than a vaccinated person. What we’re doing with these measures is causing a multitude of deaths for other reasons, it isn’t fair on people who have paid their taxes into a health system that is now failing them. We’re monetarily incentivising Dr’s to abandon other healthcare, so they can make £30 per shot. They set up clinics that only do shots as it’s incredibly profitable per day. Despite it being ruinous to Dr’s reputations speaking out, we have an ever growing list objecting to this senseless top down governance. 
 

Regarding your last point, we know a % of the population is always ignorant and that is commonplace to experience that in healthcare. We have had plenty of other preventable deaths that we aren’t up in arms about and viral infections. Your reaction comes down to data and must be proportionate. 
The worrying trend is intellectuals speaking out about this, giving serious reservations, not even so much about the jabs, their efficacy or side effects, more about government exploiting the situation to reduce freedoms. What most people are guilty of his having their eyes on the present particularly when afraid. Nobody has their eyes on the future. There are people planning ours that weren’t elected and this pandemic is the conduit. We could not be more distracted at this moment. 
 

PS Before I am accused of lacking compassion. The virus will kill my father, I am sure. He understands the cost benefit situation and what we are doing to society with these measures. It benefits one group of people only. 

Malone and McCullough speaking as experts on the matter makes about as much sense as asking a Chiropractor. They've been rightly criticized for spreading nonsense and overstating their qualifications.

Masks don't work? WTF? 

Doctors and hospitals don't make more money on CV patients. That's ridiculous.

You or anyone else calling into question the motives and intent of my wife or the thousands of other health care professionals who have been severely impacted and are at risk over a bunch of idiotic assertions made by snake oil salesman is beyond insulting. You can just FO.

Edited by Bob Ness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

This response exemplifies a point-of-view known in much of the rest of the world as “American exceptionalism”. It features a psychological projection which fuses state institutions - such as the military and judiciary - with the individual, and weirdly embodies such institutions within the individual’s personal moral universe. I would never argue that Bob as a person would advocate war crimes, but as can be seen here he is capable of excusing or rationalizing or downplaying the incredibly destructive misuse of US military power as exhibited since 2003 as merely a “mess”.

Here are some obvious questions:

If the military-industrial-complex has “legal authority” from the citizens of USA and is in fact an “extension” of these citizens, then where does legal responsibility for the massive application of military violence since 2003 begin or end? The institutional response to the “Collateral Murder” video, leaked by Manning and published by Wikileaks, does not indicate that there is any responsibility at all.

In light of the documented record which shows that the attack on Iraq in 2003 (which began the events which led to the deaths of a million persons including hundreds of thousands of civilians) was the result of deliberate high-level decisions to repudiate the United Nations Charter and lie to both the people of the United States and the rest of the world to do so, how is it even possible to portray this as a (presumably) noble effort to “unencomber the people of Iraq and Afghanistan”? Note that few in Iraq or Afghanistan asked the U.S. to do this or had any say in the decision-making at all. Does “American exceptionalism” give legal authority to the United States to override international law and make extremely consequential unilateral decisions which results in widespread death and destruction?

It seems the answer to the preceding question must be “yes” in order to then assert that efforts to expose the extent and consequence of this unilateral application of military violence is the true crime and that the initiators and perpetrators of this very serious breach of international law are in fact the “victims” of this exposure.

How is it even possible that the exposure of the extent and consequence of the massive unilateral application of military violence could make things “worse” for the “unfortunate” millions of persons who have been killed, wounded, or displaced by the violence? Do you believe that the millions of persons negatively affected by this violence should rationalize their plight as something that is merely “sad” or just a “mess”? 

Jeff- I'm sorry if my adjectives don't adequately capture the outrage you feel is required to express at what happened and is currently affecting people there. In no way was I a supporter of either action and in fact argued with other people about it to the extent I lost longtime friends. I am very well aware but could hardly imagine the pain many thousands of people suffering in those regions have to live with every moment of the day.

In fact, you're ignoring the 750,000 (Amnesty International) lives of children that were lost between 1991 and 2000 in Iraq after the first Gulf War, where sanctions imposed by Bush 1 resulted in Sadam starving his population and eviscerating any kind of health care, internally and through NGOs. Clinton had to throw his fair share in there too, partially by bombing one of the only pharmaceutical factories permitted to import drugs under the sanctions, making basic illnesses and afflictions lethal. That bombing, by the way, was covered by MSM who discovered the pretext for the attack was the CIA collection of what was said to be a "precursor element" to VX gas but actually turned out to be a version of a chemical commonly used in fertilizer. I called *gasp* and confirmed some of the details of that situation with a source at Sandia National Laboratories, who was mentioned in the mainstream newpaper article. He went through in painstaking detail (most of which I didn't understand) how the CIA screwed it up and was very open and forthcoming. I didn't believe the excuse - it seemed more likely Clinton was punishing Sadam for some embarrassing thing or the other he was doing at the time. The memory is hazy. The information was easy to get.

The point I am bringing up is I could accuse you of not caring about the Kurds, children and who knows how many Shi'a and other perceived enemies of Sadam who were slaughtered during his regime. It's interesting you have specifically and by date completely edited those victims out of your narrative. Perhaps because someone other than the US bears responsibility for at least a portion of those souls?

Of course, I know you do care about them but I'm trying to illustrate a point. Assange and Wikileaks blundered the information they were entrusted with, first by exposing their sources and breaking their promises to them (not really a concern to the US) and then by releasing information to our adversaries and their agents which will affect innumerable people, many of whom are innocent. That and the methods by which the information was obtained is what the US is taking him to task for. He had the option of taking the material and exposing the incidents and information relevant to the points you're making (I believe this is what Poitras et al did with Snowden's) and defending his decisions. Instead, the material was obtained illegally and then ceremoniously dumped to the public which included adversaries who could do damage to our legitimate interests and pose a threat to innocent people.

If someone was to break into your house, steal your computer and find you didn't pay your taxes, they couldn't very well claim that as their defense when they came to answer in court about the burglary. Any evidence obtained from the burglary wouldn't be allowed in court (could make the news though!) and the tax authorities would need to obtain that information through warrants and other methods. It's conceivable a prosecutor, judge or jury could take into account that the burglar had motives and other reasons to justify the burglary and reflect that in the charges or sentence. Assange has decided to avoid the process entirely, for more than ten years, and the chickens have come home to roost.

The US has engaged in innumerable unjustified actions which I consider war crimes but those are assertions that play out in a different venue. Unfortunately, that usually means newspapers and history books. In my view Bush and Cheney should be the first against the proverbial wall when it comes to that.

As I've said on a few different occasions in this thread, the efforts of Wikileaks to expose crimes of any military is worthy but appears (to me and others) to be done partially as an act of promotion and irresponsible retribution as witnessed by their mishandling of information critical to the lives of innocent people. The mishandling, whether intentional or due to amateurism, delegitimizes the effort and exposes it to legal consequences that didn't have to occur. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Malone and McCullough speaking as experts on the matter makes about as much sense as asking a Chiropractor. They've been rightly criticized for spreading nonsense and overstating their qualifications.

Masks don't work? WTF? 

Doctors and hospitals don't make more money on CV patients. That's ridiculous.

You or anyone else calling into question the motives and intent of my wife or the thousands of other health care professionals who have been severely impacted and are at risk over a bunch of idiotic assertions made by snake oil salesman is beyond insulting. You can just FO.

Ahhh, doubling down on the discrediting. As if it adds to merit. 
 

You’re well into this “mass psychosis” aren’t you. Have a read of one of the studies about the effectiveness of masks. I believe you can find two or three on the CDC website. Or, you can not look, as it challenges your thinking. Just stick your head in the sand. 
 

Dr’s are getting between £15 & £30 for every jab administered in the UK. If you actually looked beneath the surface, you’d see lots of ways people are profiting from this. It’s unbelievable. In Austria you can have free sex with a women (prostitute) directly after having your jab. I wonder how that sits with any morality that you have?! You’ve said to me that you have a partner in the medical profession; try asking her who is profiting, and how. This is the issue with a dumbed down population who aren’t thinking. 

Oh, I am the snake oil salesman? You are are the regular customer, who keeps coming back for more. Do you understand how top-down structures work? Christ! 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

Ahhh, doubling down on the discrediting. As if it adds to merit. 
 

You’re well into this “mass psychosis” aren’t you. Have a read of one of the studies about the effectiveness of masks. I believe you can find two or three on the CDC website. Or, you can not look, as it challenges your thinking. Just stick your head in the sand. 
 

Dr’s are getting between £15 & £30 for every jab administered in the UK. If you actually looked beneath the surface, you’d see lots of ways people are profiting from this. It’s unbelievable. In Austria you can have free sex with a women (prostitute) directly after having your jab. I wonder how that sits with any morality that you have?! You’ve said to me that you have a partner in the medical profession; try asking her who is profiting, and how. This is the issue with a dumbed down population who aren’t thinking. 

Oh, I am the snake oil salesman? You are are the regular customer, who keeps coming back for more. Do you understand how top-down structures work? Christ! 
 

 

No I'm not doubling down. I'm saying to you FO. You don't know what you're talking about yet think you do. Again. FO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surgeons don't wear masks in the operating room because they want to make a fashion statement. Masks work at preventing the spread of germs.

This is beyond elementary. Anyone who says masks don't work must also think washing hands and sterilizing equipment is also useless at preventing the spread of germs.

Ridiculous. I think people posting these kinds of statements make the entire forum look bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been wearing N95 masks indoors since March of 2020, as I wanted to be sure I did not contract Covid. Success!

Covid is aerosolized, and its particle size can't penetrate a properly fitted N95 mask.

I've also had 2 full shots and a booster dose of the Moderna vaccine. Feelin top-notch :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

The point I am bringing up is I could accuse you of not caring about the Kurds, children and who knows how many Shi'a and other perceived enemies of Sadam who were slaughtered during his regime. It's interesting you have specifically and by date completely edited those victims out of your narrative. Perhaps because someone other than the US bears responsibility for at least a portion of those souls?

I didn’t “edit it out”. The context is GWOT, which began with the attack on Afghanistan in October 2001 and intensified with the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Global activism in response to the widespread harm initiated by GWOT is the immediate context of the formation of Wikileaks.

 

2 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

Assange and Wikileaks blundered the information they were entrusted with, first by exposing their sources and breaking their promises to them (not really a concern to the US) and then by releasing information to our adversaries and their agents which will affect innumerable people, many of whom are innocent. That and the methods by which the information was obtained is what the US is taking him to task for.

You keep repeating this, and it appears as the crux of your argument why Assange should be put on trial in the U.S. What are your sources? Certainly a decade ago there was a lot of speculation published in mainstream media of potential risks to persons who may have been exposed by Wikileaks, but by the time of the Manning trial it became apparent that internal US military documents could not identify anyone who had been harmed.

See - “Military Fails to Link Leaks With Any Deaths”  (July 31, 2013)

https://www.courthousenews.com/military-fails-to-link-leaks-with-any-deaths/

As well, as I explained to you, the issues of potential harm, proper vetting, and Wikileaks policies concerning receipt and publication of information were covered in detail at the original extradition hearing in September 2020. The prosecution declined to rebut the defence’s thorough presentation, which materially contradicts most of your assertions. Daniel Ellsberg’s presentation at the hearing, which I referred previously, was in particular thoughtful and philosophical regarding issues of leaking information and the associated responsibilities.

 

3 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

Assange has decided to avoid the process entirely, for more than ten years, and the chickens have come home to roost.

Assange did not “avoid the process entirely”. Assange is not an American citizen and Wikileaks did not operate in the United States. He had no obligation to surrender himself to a U.S. courtroom or the caprices of the U.S. justice system. As it stands, his liberty was taken from him through a series of questionable legal maneuvers which have involved three states (U.S., UK, Sweden), two of which were instrumental in initiating the massive destruction and chaos sown by GWOT in the first place. American officials have plotted Assange’s death, plotted his extra-legal kidnapping, and through a CIA contractor extensively spied on Assange including privileged meetings with his legal counsel. The extradition process has been wholly out of normal legal bounds, adopting the character of what were once known as Soviet show trials. That it is Assange, and not any of the well identified persons responsible for initiating the GWOT chaos, who faces significant time inside the sadistic isolation regimes of the U.S. prison system (facilities where all the whistleblowers and leakers to date have been condemned) is beyond “unjust” and the consequences of this sordid act of revenge will be profound.

 

3 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

the efforts of Wikileaks to expose crimes of any military is worthy but appears (to me and others) to be done partially as an act of promotion and irresponsible retribution as witnessed by their mishandling of information critical to the lives of innocent people. The mishandling, whether intentional or due to amateurism, delegitimizes the effort and exposes it to legal consequences that didn't have to occur. 

Again, since the Manning trial, US officials have conceded that they cannot identify specific examples of any but reputational harm caused by Wikileaks. You insist otherwise - what are your sources for such assertion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to have TDS, go ahead. I think Trump has the wrong personality to the President. 

But, if you want to spend the rest of your lives yelping at Trump...you are like hunting dogs that surround a bonsai tree in a redwood forest. Bark-bark!

You think Trump is the problem? 

The national security state has about $1.2 trillion (annually) at its disposal (DoD, DHS, VA, black budget.)

The Deep State has hooks deep into M$M...so much so the previously pretty smart Rachel Maddow has become a CIA-simp. 

The two major political parties are held tight to the national security state. Think Deep Purple. 

More and more content is being censored off the Internet. The "left wing" loves  censorship! Who knew? 

A US-funded CCP lab in Wuhan was the likely source of C19. 

Bush Jr. got the US into not one but two fantastically expensive, counter-productive wars, full of carnage to break the heart. LBJ-Nixon before Bush jr. 

Trump? 

Beyond all that, 1/6 was a scrum...there is no evidence, no texts, no e-mails, no phone-calls, no letters by passenger pigeon, connecting Trump officials to scrum participants. 

There may have been federal instigators on 1/6...and you have Liz Cheney in charge of the investigation into that?  Oh sure, let's believe Liz Cheney.  

The Trump Bonsai Tree has become a sacred pilgrimage, a place to wave self-righteous badges. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, John Butler said:

Current statistics suggest that 0.2285 percent of the people have died in the US from Covid.  800,000 deaths.  That's 99.7715 (pop. 350,000,000) percent who survive or are unaffected by the disease.  Another statistic says that 1 out of 100 old people catch covid and die.  99% odds is good enough for me not to be concerned.  Of course, when I say this, others say well, people have died.  And, that is true.  Are you afraid with these odds?  

John Butler:

 

I agree with you. I always thought C19 was hyped, and especially the state responses. 

The public health sector saw how well the national security state has done with fear-mongering...and followed suit? 

More abjectly, none of the state responses seem to have worked against C19, with the exception of mainland China. I don't want to give up that much freedom.

Now they are fear-mongering omicron. And the next variant? Viruses adapt continually. A new perma-war? 

Some wars you lose. The war on C19 is a losing war. Time to move on. 

But you know what? The war-perps never want to concede defeat, as that means they were wrong all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, John Butler said:

Current statistics suggest that 0.2285 percent of the people have died in the US from Covid.  800,000 deaths.  That's 99.7715 (pop. 350,000,000) percent who survive or are unaffected by the disease.  Another statistic says that 1 out of 100 old people catch covid and die.  99% odds is good enough for me not to be concerned.  Of course, when I say this, others say well, people have died.  And, that is true.  Are you afraid with these odds?  

Afraid? No. Circumspect in my behavior? Yes. These apparently small figures ignore this: 50 million plus people have been infected that they know of. Today 60,000 people were in the hospital being treated for CV. Today. If you had a mass in your rectum that needed to be removed and couldn't because of unvaccinated CV patients plugging up the hallways I'd bet you'd sing a different tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...